ſae）;;:} ）; ſººſ¿? • • • • • · · · · · · * * ſ = r * * *$'， ）， * ， , ， ， . ， , , , „Rºſs ~• v • • • • |， ！-· ºſſaeº ae, ######----ea :：！ 1 №ſſºiſſº， ſae *** ！ ·r.ſaeſ，Eſſeſ， · |-- ··############## ſi №ſiſiĶī£§§- -- · 。、:#€$£§######################- ſae §§ -· -ſą:-- -· -， ， ，-::：:::::: *º º***·- -|- - |-------- --####-|-- -#### :iſ:№ſ};23.;{{{ſ}·|-· § ø § -- .ºrºs， º-·-* * *· : ： ?- -|- t -，*##..···~·-· ·-|-|-- ſae,- rt -* - # • ● \{};! §::::::::: jººkſ: +32° :i::::：:::：:: e- >. . §§ iſ 2T1 B 5 º IIIlº ||||||||||||||||U||||W NIITTTTTTT º #IIIlllllllllll # ſº Yº: Uſ!. - r º w Xiºgs Ş. Qº . º º LIBRARY Sºyof THE EISTORMichigan % ºf Eſſº : ºº M. (s - º s - i # º: * E . …-----. ~~~~ … E Hºt: 3: EROM THE LI is RARY OF ...º E : -- º: ... Priºsi D1:NT ÉÉ. ºixxiºs is. ANGELI. f tº ººººº tºº sº CºCC - C ~ ºr- | - ºriºſ: CC 33% % AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. i)00UMENTS AND PROGEEDINGS OF THE HALIFAX COMMISSION, Ism. UNDER THE i TREATY OF WASHINGTON OF MAY 8, 1871. IN T H R E E W O L U M E S. VOLUME III. º º ſº § | jº : º W A S EI IN G T ON : G () W E R N MIR, N T P R IN TIN G OFFIC E. 1878. A DIPIENTIDIX TA, [Continued.] No. 32. MICHAEL MACAULAY, of Gloucester, Mass., fisherman and master mariner, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster: Question. You are skipper of a schooner out of Gloucester 7—Answer. Yes. Q. What is the name 2—A. The Noonday. Q. Where were you born ?—A. In Prince Edward Island. Q. How many years have you been fishing 2—A. About twelve V623 TS, Q. The first part of the time for mackerel and at present for cod 7– A. Yes. - Q. How do you happen in here?—A. I came in here with a sick man from the Grand Banks. Q. And you have been in command of this vessel two years?—A. Yes; about that. Q. Before that you were fishing as a sharesman 7–A. Yes. Q. How many years were you cod-fishing 2—A. Seven years, I guess. Q. Where?—A. On the Grand Bank. - Q. Now, when you began to go cod fishing to the Grand Bank, how did you supply yourselves with bait 2–A. We took it from home. We used to get some on the Banks in the summer time. Q. What did you take with you ?—A. Salt bait, pogy slivers. Q. Slivers are pogies and menhaden cut off the bones 2—A. Fish cut off the bone each side. Q. What else?—A. We used to put that on, and what we used to pick up on the Bank; small halibut and other small fish. Q. How long is it since you began to go to Newfoundland for bait?— A. Well, it is about four years since I have first been there for herring. I guess We were there as soon as any of them. Q. When you go to Newfoundland for herring, how do you get it?— A. We take it out of the Seines. Q. How do you pay for it 2–A. We pay so much. Q. How much, usually 3–A. Well, there are certain times they charge pretty high. At other times they don’t charge so high. We paid as high as $25 this summer, and took as much as we wanted. . . Q. How many times have you been in this summer for bait 2–A. I have been in for herring twice. 293 60 2328 . AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What else have you been for ?—A. Squid, twice. Q. How did you get squid 7– A. Well, they caught them ; jigged and took them alongside the first time, and we bought them salted the second time. * Q. Who jigged them the first time 2—A. The natives. Q. How much did you pay for them 3–A. Two dollars a barrel. Q. The salt squid did you get last time 2—A. Yes. • Q. Does this answer for bait 2–A. It is not so good; but we could not get anything else. Q. How many times have you been to Newfoundland for bait 2—A. Since I have been skipper ? Q. Yes.—A. Well, I have been about six times in two years. Q. And how many times did you go before that, while you were shares- man 7–A. I have been back and forward for the last four years. I have been there as much as, I suppose, ten or twelve times before I went skipper. Q. Now, won’t you tell the Commissioners what is the longest and what is the shortest time that it has ever taken to go from the Bank into Newfoundland to get bait and return to the fishing ground 3—A. The shortest time I have been would be about nine days. Q. What is the longest ?—A. I have been four weeks. Q. How did that happen ?—A. I could not get it. I was hunting it up, trying to get it. - Now, you have fished with salt bait taken from home, not going near Newfoundland, and you have gone in as a skipper half a dozen times, and as sharesman ten or twelve times to buy bait 3–A. Yes. Q. I want you to state whether in your opinion the advantages of going to Newfoundland to procure bait are worth anything.—A. Well, when we used to carry bait from home, we used to catch some fish, but since we went to run fresh bait we didn’t catch half the quantity We used to catch, I don’t think, when we used to take bait from home, bes cause we lose half our time and more looking for fresh bait. - Q. You lose half your time 2—A. Yes. Q. You don't consider it an advantage %–A. No ; I don’t consider it an advantage at all. Q. Have you ever got caplin there for bait 2—A. No ; I never took any caplin. I have never been in a vessel that had any. Q. Now, before you were cod-fishing you made some mackerel voyages, I think?—A. Yes; I have been four or five years for mackerel before I Went for Cod. Q. What vessels were you in 2 Begin with the earliest mackerel schooner you were in.—A. I have been in the Moonlight. That was the first vessel, John Spriggan, captain. Q. What year 2—A. About 1865, I guess. - Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you take that year?—A. Well, I took off and on about 150 barrels, I guess. I Q. Where did you take them 2–A. Most of them around the Magda- €IłS. Q. What was the next schooner you were in 7–A. The Easterwood, Captain Galasky. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you take in her ?—A. Well, ºween 180 and 190. I could not be certain; off and on, about that. Q. Where were they taken 2–A. We caught them between the North Cape and around the Magdalens; up between the Magdalens and North Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2329 Cape. We used to fish in different places, but the most part was taken around the Magdalens. * Q. What was the third schooner you were in 2—A. The Charles P. Thompson. No, I was mistaken. The second schooner I was in Was the James Bliss. Q. Who was the captain 3–A. James Walsh. f Q. How many barrels did you take in her ?—A. Two hundred and Orty. Q. Where were they taken 2–A. Part of them to the northward of North Cape, what we call Bradley Bank, and abroad off North Cape. . Q. Were any of those taken within three miles 3–A. No, we didn't catch any. I don’t know but we tried and got a few there, but not any- thing over a dozen or so. Q. Where was that ?—A. It was to the westward of North Cape— what they call Tignish. Q. You think you caught a dozen barrels inshore ?—A. No, not a dozen ; we might have caught a dozen or twenty, mackerel to a man. Q. What was the fourth vessel you were in mackereling %–A. The Charles P. Thompson was the fourth. Q. What year was that, do you remember 2—A. Well, it was about 1869, I guess. Q. Who was her captain 3–A. Edward Cash. - - Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you take in her ?—A. About 95 barrels; between that and 100. We caught them up northward. Q. Was she a new vessel ?—A. No. The James Bliss was a new VeS- Sel. g Q. Now I would ask you, so far as your observation goes, what is the principal fishing-ground for mackerel-schooners in the Gulf of St. Lawrence %–A. Where I have principally fished in my time Was around the Magdalens. That was the principal ground in my going to fish. - - Q. Did you ever fish much off the Bight of Prince Edward Island?— A. No, I never did. Q. Have you been there ?—A. Yes; I have been there working up and down shore, but I never fished any there. I might have tried abroad off East Point, or abroad off the North Cape ; but I have never been in a vessel that fished in the bend of the island, because it is a place where they don’t want to fish very often. - Q. Why not?—A. Because they don’t like the ground. They don’t like to fish. They don’t call it a very safe place to fish. - Q. IS it a place that is avoided by— A. Fishermen 2 Yes. Q. Why?—A. Because it is a place where, if they are caught with the wind easterly or northeasterly, we can’t get out. Q. You lived at Prince Edward Island 20 years 7–A. Yes; I was born there and lived there until I came to Gloucester. Q. Do you ever fish there from the shore ?—A. Well, I have gone fish- ing there from the shore. What part of the island did you live at 2– A. At St. Peter's, right in the bend. Q. Did you ever see boats fishing on the island 2–A. Yes. Q. I would like to know how far from the shore these fishing boats around Prince Edward Island go out for mackerel, or used to when you Were there?—A. I would judge in my way that they would go from three to five miles. y - Q. One question more; as you have been sailing out of Gloucester now for some years, what, is the principal fishing business of Glouces- ter?—A. I should think codfish and halibut the principal. 2330 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. By Mr. Davies: Q. You lived at St. Peter's 3–A. Yes. - Q. How long since you lived on the island 7–A. Twelve years. Q. That would be 1865?–A. Yes. Q. That was when you first went in the Moonlight 3–A. Yes. Q. You have never been on the island since you left there ?—A. No. Q. How old are you now %–A. About 33. Q. You left the island when you were about 21 ?–A. Yes. . Are your people engaged much in St. Peter's in the fisheries 7– A. They do go fishing a good deal. They catch fish enough for them- Selves any way. Q. That is just what I want to know. I never understood that you engaged in the fisheries largely 2—A. Well, they catch always enough for themselves. I don’t know that they catch any more. That is all, I guess. - Q. There are no fishing-stages there ?—A. No, they can’t keep fishing- Stages there. & * g Q. It is a very exposed place?—A. To my recollection that is so. Q. Then you never were at any of the fishing-stages fishing on the island 7–A. No. * Q. You never were to Rustico, New London, Cascumpec, or Tignish Ż —A. No. & Q. You never saw them fishing there ?–A. I have seen the boats fish- ing there. Q. Will you venture the assertion that those boats fishing off those places fish farther than three miles?—A. I should think off Rustico they fish as much as ten miles. Q. As a general rule, you think that ?—Yes, because it is a place with Shoal water, and they have to go quite a piece off. Q. Do you give that as your actual opinion or mere supposition ?—A. My opinion is that I have seen them ages outside of ten miles. Q. Where?—A. Where I have been fishing up and down in those Vessels. Q. But you have said you never fished around Prince Edward Island 7 —A. Well, I said I have made passages up and down the island. Q. What year was that you made passages?—A. Well, probably I have been—I don’t know——but I have been every year I have been in the bay. Probably we might work up from the northward up as far as East Point, Q. Now, every man who was brought here from Rustico, and every man at Rustico who has made an affidavit, has stated that three- fourths to nine-tenths of the fish caught in that harbor are caught Within three miles of land. Mr. FOSTER objects to this question, for which, after a short argu- ment, the following question was substituted. By Mr. Davies: Q. Here is a deponent, Alexander McNeil, who says: I would think the number of fishing-boats at Rustico harbors would number about one hundred and fifty. - My twenty years' experience has proved to me that the best mackerel-fishing around our coast is about a mile from the shore, in from 7 to 10 fathoms of water. All the fish caught by the boats are taken within a mile of the coast, many of them with- in half a mile, during the months of July and August, but during the months of September and October the boats take their catch farther out, say two miles or two and a half. It is a very rare occasion that they go out three miles or beyond it. l Of the total catch in the boats, over nine-tenths is caught well within the three-mile imit. Q AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2331 Have you sufficient experience off. Rustico Harbor to give evidence in contradiction of that I have read 7–A. Well, I state what I have said. I have seen boats over ten miles fishing for mackerel off Rustico. Q. Have you had sufficient experience of fishing off Rustico to give any evidence?—A. I have never fished off Rustico. - Q. Will you say it is true or not ?–A. I can’t tell. Q. How far have you been fishing off Rustico Harbor 7—A. I never fished. - Q. How often have you passed within three miles there ?—A. I don’t know—very seldom. - Q. Did you ever ?—A. I don't know that I did. Q. Then you can’t possibly tell whether the boats fish there or not ?— A. I say I have seen them fishing off ten miles. Q. Were they large or small boats 3–A. Large. Q. How often have you seen them fish off ten miles?—A. Five or six times. e Q. Is that as often as you have been there ?—A. Probably that is as Often. wº Q. Have you seen them fishing in other parts of the island 2–A. Yes. Q. What other parts 3–A. Up and down the shore. I have seen boats off shore fishing. - - Q. Now, here is Daniel Ross, of Rustico, fish merchant. He says: I myself am a practical fisherman and enſ, ge personally in the catching and curing as well as in the sale of the fish. - That the best mackerel-fishing is about one mile or one mile and a half from the coast-line : * shore, and very frequently the best catches are made much closer to the shore than ab. That the mackerel-fishing prosecuted in boats from the shore is chiefly within the limit of two miles; at times the schools of mackerel go farther out, extending as far as three miles and beyond that, but I have no hesitation in positively swearing that at least nine-tenths ºths) of the mackerel caught by the boat-fishermen are caught within the three-mile IIIllty, Would you like, from your experience, to contradict that ?—A. I could not tell you where they were caught, but I have said what I have Said, that I have seen them fishing outside of three miles. Q. How many boats did you see there?—A. I didn’t count them. Q. I want to know if you yourself ever fished up and down the coast of the island 3–A. I might have tried, but never anything inside of three miles. I have never been in within three miles. Q. When you were living on the island did you never see the Ameri- can fleet Sailing up and down 3–A. Often. Q. Many of them 2–A. There used to be a good many. Q. What number used you consider there were ?—A. I could not tell; I don’t know that I ever counted. - Q. How many was the fleet of American vessels supposed to be 3–A. How many vessels 3 Q. Yes. How many American vessels were there in the fleet sailing up and down 3–A. Sometimes as high as three or four ; sometimes ten Or fifteen. - Q. Did you ever see as many as 100 at one time going past 3—A. No. Q. What would take them into that dangerous place 3—A. Many of them passed up and down, probably— * Q. Have you any idea that they were fishing 3–A. They may have been Some of them fishing half way across. Q. You could not see that ?—A. Well, you could see them half way a CPOSS, 2332 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What? Twenty-eight miles from shore ?—A. It is only twenty- eight miles across from East Point to Magdalen Islands. Q. You were not at East Point. You were at St. Peter's.—A. You can’t tell. I have been up and down. Q. Well, you say, then, you have been at East Point %–A. I have been there often. - ſ Q. Have you ever seen the fleet around East Point %–A.. I have seen Vessels in there, Q. That is not what I asked you. Have you ever seen the fleet there? —A. Yes; I have seen the fleet. Q. How many would you see ?—A. Probably fifteen or twenty. Q. You have never seen them within three miles there ?—A. Not fishing—I never did. - - Q. Have you seen them at all within three miles 7–A. I have seen them Sailing within three miles. Q. Fifteen or twenty º–A. Yes. Q. Were they not fishing º–A. I could not say they were fishing. Q. Could you say they were not fishing 2—A. Yes. - Q. How could you say that ?—A. They were sailing. They don’t fish When they are sailing. Q. Have you never seen them within three miles unless they are sail- ing 3–A. I have seen them at anchor within three miles. Q: What were they doing there then 3–A. They were making lee; it Was blowing too hard. Q. You don’t know whether they were fishing them or not ?–A. I never Saw them. Q. They go there for shelter, to that dangerous place 2—A. There is no danger there. They have a way to get out of that part of the bay; but in the bend they haven’t. º Q. Did you ever catch fish in Bay Chaleurs?—A.. I did. Q. In what vessel ?–A. Well, what do you call Bay Chaleurs ? Q. Don’t you know % As a master-mariner, don’t you know where Bay Chaleurs is 2—A. Well, I have fished across from the Magdalens. Q. But don’t you know what Bay Chaleurs is ?–A. Yes. Q. Well, why do you ask me 2—A. Well, I call it right across from Magdalens to Bay Chaleurs. Wherever we fish down there we call it IBay Chaleurs. Q. You call it Bay Chaleurs?—A. Yes; I call it Bay Chaleurs fishing. Q. It has a good reputation for fishing, has it, the Bay Chaleurs; has it, among American fishermen 3–A. Well, that is what I always hear them call it. 3- - - Q. Have you ever been in the Bay Chaleurs proper fishing?—A. Yes, I have. e Q. In what vessel ?—A. I have been in the Charles P. Thomson. Q. Any other ?—A. I might be in the James Bliss too. Q. Might you in any other vessel ?—A. No. Q. Will you swear you were not in Bay Chaleurs in the Moonlight Or Easterwood —A. I might be there working up and down. I don’t know if ever I fished in there. Q. You have no recollection of ever fishing in the Bay Chaleurs ?—A. I don’t know if ever I fished there. | - Q. In the other two vessels you did; where did you fish?—A. We tried Once at North Cape; that is, in the bay and well to the westward of it. Q. Point out on the map where North Cape is.—A. Well, I know Where it is. - Q. I want you to show it on the map.–A. (Witness points to North AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2333 Cape, Prince Edward Island.) That (pointing to waters between North Cape and Miramichi Bay) is what I call Bay Chaleurs fishing. Q. Do you know Miscou Point %—A. Yes. Q. Did you go around Point Miscou?—A. I have been to anchor there, not fishing. - * Q. Then you have been inside of Point Miscou at anchor 7—A. Yes. Q. Were there other vessels there too 7–A. There might be. Q. Have you seen other vessels there ?—A. Yes. Q. Have you ever tried to fish in that bay ?—A. No. Q. Have you heard of other vessels fishing there 3—A.. I have heard of other vessels fishing there. Q. You never tried to fish yourself?—A. No, I have never fished in a vessel that fished up in the bay, but I have been in vessels that fished off Miscou light. Q. Did they make good catches 7–A. No, nothing extra. Q. How many did you catch off there ?–A. Well, we might catch a dozen barrels or so. * Q. Did you ever fish on the Cape Breton shore ?—A. I have been down to Margaree once. - Q. In the fall ?—A. Yes. - Q. IS that known to be a good fishing-ground among the Ameri- Cans ?—A. I have heard talk that it used to be. w Q. Did you fish there 3—A. I have been there once. Q. Did you catch any fish 7–A. Nothing Worth speaking of. Q. There were other vessels there; what year was that ?—A. About 1868, Q. What time of the year 7–A. In the fall. Q. That was after the mackerel-fishing in the bay was done?—A. No, it was about the first of the month, the first of October. - Q. Is that the season when they generally go to Margaree ?—A. Yes, I have never been there but once. Q. The time you went did they go 2–A. There was a dozen sail when I Called there. - Q. How long did you stay to see whether there were fish there or not 3–A. One day. - . Q. You can’t tell whether the others caught them or not ?—A. No. Q. Have you ever been to Seven Islands 2—A. No. Q. Nor up the shores of the river St. Lawrence %—A. No. Q. Nor around Bonaventure?—A. No, I have never been around Bonaventure, but I have been once at anchor at Port Daniel. Q. Have you heard of this being a good fishing-ground 3—A. No ; I have heard it mentioned that fish were caught there, but never that it was a good fishing-ground. Q. You don’t know what quantities were caught, of course 3—A. No. Q. Did you ever ask whether it was good or not ?—A. No. Q. You never were a master of a vessel during those years you were in 3—A. No ; I was a mere hand. Q. You caught 95 barrels one year, 150 another, 180 a third, and 240 another year. Were these very small catches 2—A. Yes. Q. And you never caught any within three miles?—A. I don’t know but We might catch a few ; never anything worth speaking of. Q. And you didn’t try 3–A. We did try once or twice. Q. Had you a license to fish when you were there?—A. I could not exactly tell you. r Q. But you ran in to try º–A. We were in making lee. - Q. You never tried to keep outside 3—A. I could not tell you; I have 2334 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. seen some vessels keep outside. I have seen them making lee and get- ting under way and running out. By Mr. Whiteway: Q. You have been seven years cod-fishing?—A. Yes, about seven years. * Q. Part of these at Grand Bank º–A. Yes, all. Q. You commenced in ’71, I think?—A. Yes, about that. Q. Can you tell me what vessel you were in that year?—A. I have been in the Midnight. Q. How many trips?—A. Three trips; that is, on the Grand Banks. Q. Do you recollect the quantity of fish you took each trip º–A. Well, I could not exactly say. Q. Did you use salt or fresh bait 3–A. Salt. Q. What bait did you first take"—A. Slivers the first trip. We got squid on the bank the Second trip, and then used salt bait the last trip. Q. T)id you take any Salt bait for the second trip 3–A. Yes, sir. Q. You didn’t use it'—A. No. Q. What quantity did you take each trip 3–A. Ten or fifteen barrels each trip. Q. What vessel were you in the second trip º–A. I have been in the Midnight two years. Q. How many trips did you make that year 2—A. Two. Q. What quantity did you take; do you remember 3–A. I could not recollect. Q. Did you use salt bait or fresh 7–A. We used salt bait. Q. Altogether, for the two trips?—A. No ; we got some fresh bait on the Bank—some squid one trip ; we caught them on the Bank. Q. On the first trip you used altogether salt bait 3–A. Yes. Q. The third year, what vessel were you in 7–A. I was in the Noon- day. Q. Do you remember how many trips you made?—-A. I was mistaken; in the third year I was in the Enola C. Q. Do you remember how many trips?—A. I was only in her one trip; I was fresh fishing in the spring, and then went for salt, fish, Q. Fresh fishing on the American coast 2—A. No ; on the Grand Banks. We made three trips. We went in March ; about the first of March. - Q. Do I understand that you went about the first of March and made three trips for fresh fish 7–A. Yes. Q. Then you made one trip for salt fish; do you recollect the quan- tity of fish you took?—A. I could not say; something over 140,000 pounds. * Q. That is salt fish 7–A. Yes. Q. You don't recollect the quantity of fresh fish you took?—A. No. . Q. Did you use salt bait that season 7–A. Yes; we did catch some fresh bait on the Bank part of the trip. Q. That is, on the salt-fishing trip you used partly salt bait and partly fresh 3—A. Yes. Q. The fourth year, what vessel were you in 3–A. The Noonday. Q. How many trips did you make that year 3–A. Two trips. Q. Do you remember the quantity you took 3–A. We took 170,000 pounds the first trip. Q. That would be in 774 %–A. Yes. - Q. How much did you take the second trip 2–A. We had 165,000. Q. What bait did you use 7–A. Fresh bait caught on the Banks. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2335 Q. Now the fifth year, what vessel were you in ?—A. The Noonday. Q. How many trips did you make 3–A. I made one salt trip. Q. How much fish did you catch 3–A. We caught 110,000. Q. How many trips did you make for fresh fish 7–A. We made three trips for fresh fish. Q. Where did you get your bait that year?—A. In Newfoundland. Q. That is the first year you went to Newfoundland, is it 3–A. No ; We were in the year before that. Q. You stated before that you got bait on the Banks, now you say you got it in Newfoundland. Which is correct 2—A. We got our bait in Newfoundland the fifth year. Q. That is 1875?—A. Yes. Q. Is that the first year you got it in there 7–A. Yes. Q. Just now you said you had been into Newfoundland for bait in 1874% Then you have only been in three years 3–A. And this year. Q. That is 775, 776, and '77—only three years 7–A. Didn’t I tell you I was in the first trip in the Noonday. Q. Did you go into Newfoundland for fresh bait in 1874 for the first time, or was it in 1875?—A. I told you— Q. Just answer simply 3–A. 1874. Q. Then you were incorrect just now when you said you caught it that year on the Banks 7–A. Well, I caught part of it. The first trip we went into Newfoundland, and the second trip got it on the Banks. Q. You went into Newfoundland in the spring for your first bait 2– A. Yes. Q. Where did you go?—A. To Fortune Bay. Q. Did you take a seine and catch the bait yourself?—A. No. Q. Did you employ people there to catch it for you ?–A. Yes. Q. How many barrels of bait did you get 2—A. Somewhere about 40 barrels. Q. And you gave them $25 or thereabouts º–A. Not that year; it was $50 that year. Q. Well, now, in 1875 you say you got 110,000 pounds of fish. What vessel were you in in 1876?–A. The Noonday. - Q. How many trips ?—A. One trip. Q. How many fish did you take?–A. 80,000–78,000. Q. Had you luade any trips for fresh fish in the spring 2—A. Yes. Q. How many 3–A. Three or four—four. * Q. Where did you get bait for the fresh fish 7–A. We got it down the shore here; some in Prospect. 1% You caught the fresh bait yourselves 7–A. No ; we bought it there. w Q. Did you employ people to catch it for you ?—A. They came along- Side with it, and we bought it from them. Q. What was it 7–A. Herring. Q. The trip you made for salt fish, where did you get bait 2–A. Some On the Cape Breton shore. We got the first bait on the Cape Breton Shore, and the next in St. John’s. Q. For the first three or four trips you went for fresh fish, and then you Went for a trip for salted fish 7–A. Yes. yº. For the first bait for the salt fish you went to Cape Breton ?—A. {*S. z Q. And the second bait to St. John's 2–A. Yes. - Q. What time did you go into St. John's 3–A. We went there about the last of October. Q. What bait did you get then ?—A. Squid. 2336 AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. Q. Was that fresh squid"—A. Yes. Q. Then you went to the Banks and completed your trip 7–A. Well, part of a trip ; we didn’t get much of a trip at that. Q. You completed your 78,000 pounds 2—A. Yes. Q. And returned home 2—A. Yes. - Q. What time did you get home 2—A. I could not exactly say. Q. Now, this year, what vessel were you in 7—A. The Noonday again. Q. What were you doing this year?—A. Salt-fishing. - Q. All the year 3–A. Yes. - Q. How many trips have you made 3—A. I am on the Second now. Q. Returning home 2—A. No. - - Q. Are you going out now %–A. I am going to the Banks. I have made one trip. s Q. How much did you take 2—A. Off and on about 100,000. . Where did you get bait for that trip 3–A. At Fortune Bay. . What time of the year?—A. About the 10th of May, the first bait. . You live at Gloucester.—A. Yes. . What time did you leave Gloucester 2—A. We left on the 2d day Of March. & º • * Q. Where did you go in the interim between that and the 10th of May 2—A. Fishing on the Banks, on Grand Bank. * Q. What bait did you use 7–A. We took a little bait from home— enough to start with. I was fishing halibut, Salt halibut. - Q. With what bait were you fishing”—A. We caught bait on the ground. Q. You went from home without any bait at all ?—A. We took enough to start with. Q. What did you take 3–A. About two or three thousand herring— three thousand. * Q. They were frozen herring %–A. Yes. Q. Whe e did you get them 3–A. They came from down East. Q. Did you go directly from that into Fortune Bay for fresh bait 3– A. I fished on the Banks near two months. Q. Did you go from that, after the 10th of May, to Fortune Bay for fresh bait 3–A. Yes. *. Q. Did you catch any bait in Fortune Bay ?—A. No. Q. Had you a herring Seine on board 3–A. No. Q. Did you see many of your countrymen in there looking for bait 2– A. Yes. - f Q. A great many of them 3–A. A good many. - Q. Did they catch bait themselves, some of them 3–A. No, they never catch bait. They have it seined there. Q. Were you on board their vessels?—A. Yes, I was. ‘. Q. Are you not aware that many of them take down large herring seines and get bait themselves?—A. I never heard it. Q. You never heard of their having barred any of the coves there?— A. No. - - Q. During the last spring, in Fortune Bay, have they not barred her- rings in the coves 3–A. O, yes; they have them barred as long as Six weeks waiting for the Americans to come for them ; that is the natives I am speaking of. Q. Have not the American cod-fishers, some of them, taken large herring-seines with them and used them for taking herring and barring the coves?—A. No ; I haven’t heard of it. - Q. You are now going out. On your Second trip 7–A. Yes. ; AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2337 Q. Now, you have given us an account of your voyages, in 1874, 1875, 1876, and 1877; those are the years you used fresh bait 3–A. Yes. Q. You don’t recollect your voyages for 1871, 1872, and 1873; those were the years you used salt bait 3–A. Those years we used salt bait. Q. You alleged just now that during the years you used salt bait your voyages were superior to those made when you used fresh bait"— A. Yes. ,8 Q. Well, you don’t remember your catches when you used salt bait 2– A. I don’t remember the quantity of fish we took home, because I was a hand. Probably I might have known if I had inquired into it. Q. How is it you pledge your oath that during the years you used Salt bait you took more fish than when you used fresh bait, when you dou’t remember what quantity of fish you took with the salt bait 7–A. Well, I might have known nearly, but I could not tell exactly what fish We took to a pound or so. * Q. You have told me distinctly that you did not remember the quan- tities you took in 1871, 1872, and 1873%—A. No, I could not say ex- actly. *- Q. You can’t remember 3—A. No. I know I got a good deal more money. Q. If you can’t remember the quantity of fish you took how can you say you took more than in the four succeeding years?—A. Well, I can tell, because the last two years I have been skipper myself, and the Other two I have been with a man that had been in this vessel before I took her. I knew the number of fish because he and I worked together, and I found out what number. These other years I never asked the skippers probably the number of fish we landed. Q. Well, you still affirm upon oath that you took larger quantities of fish with salt bait than with fresh 3—A. Well, not with salt bait, but that and what we caught on the Banks. Q. You stated now that you took a larger quantity with salt bait than with fresh 7–A. Well, I didn’t state that, but we catch bait on the Banks as well as using Salt bait. I told you we were catching part on the Banks. • Q. Then you say you caught a larger quantity when you didn’t go into the coast of Newfoundland 3–A. Yes. Q. You are sure as to that now %–A. Yes. Q. You can’t tell the Commission what quantity you took during those years? You can’t remember 2—A. Well, I could not tell you the certain number. Q. Then how can you tell that the number was larger or smaller ?– A. Because I made more money. Q. Do you remember the amount of money you made in 1871?—A. Well, I could tell you, I suppose. - Q. Will you tell us?—A. I might figure it up. Q. Will you tell us what money you made in 1871 ? Can you recol- lect 3—A. I could not exactly tell you. - Q. In 1872? If you can’t, answer yes or no.—A. What do you mean * Salt, fish Ż Q. What money did you make in 1872?–A. I made about $500 I think. Q. That is fresh and salt”—A. Yes. Q. For the season 7–A. Yes. Q. All the other hands made the same 2—A. Yes. Q. Do you remember what you made in 1873%—A. No ; I could not exactly tell you. & 147 F 2338 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Do you remember what you made in 1874%—A. No. Q. In 1875?–A. I can’t exactly tell you what I made. Q. In 1876?–A. I didn’t keep any run of it like that. Q. You can't tell about 1876?–A. No ; I didn't keep any run of it. Q. I suppose you can’t say as to this year because it is not ended yet?—A. Probably if I figured it up I could tell you what I made. Q. Now, you say you have been four years into Newfoundland for bait. During the last two years you have been master and during the first two years you were a hand on board 3–A. Yes. Q. That is all ?—A. Yes; that is all into St. John's. Q. Were you into any other port—Long Harbor?—A. No ; I was in Cape Breton. - Q. You were in St. John's once, that is, on the Newfoundland coast, in 1876?–A. Yes. Q. This year you have been in four times. Where have you been 3– A.. I have been to Long Harbor, and I have been to Fortune Bay twice, and I have been to Bay Bulls once, and St. John’s once. Well, I have been in several places up and down the shore looking for bait, but did not get any. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Where did you usually fish on the Grand Banks 3–A. Well, I could not tell you the certain spot, because we fished all over it pretty much. By Mr. Whiteway: Q. Can't you tell the latitude and longitude of the place you fished ? —A. We did not fish in any one certain spot. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Is it not a long way to go from the Bank to Fortune Bay ? Are there not places along here (pointing to the coast from Cape Francis to Cape Race) where you can get bait 2–A. We might not find any bait there. We go all over looking for it. - By Mr. Whiteway: Q. You go to Fortune Bay in the spring before you go to the Bank at all 3–A. No. - Q. Do you mean to say you go into Fortune Bay from the Banks and then go out again º–A. Yes. * Q. Now, when you go into Fortune Bay is it on the Grand Banks you are fishing or to the Southward 3–A. It is on the Grand Bank. Q. Are you on the Grand Banks or on St. Peter's and Green Banks when you go to Fortune Bay for bait 3–A. We are on the Grand Bank. Q. Always º–A. Yes. Q. Now, you say you can’t tell upon what part of the Grand Banks you fished ?–A. No ; you probably set trawls in the evening, and if you find no fish you are under sail next morning. You are under Sail nearly every day. We were under sail nearly every day last trip. We fish in 44 latitude one day, and next time we set trawls it will be in 44%, next time in 45. Q. You fish at different places 3–A. Yes. Q. Do you keep a log-book 3––A. Yes. Q. On board ship º–A. Yes. Q. Have you that here now %–A. No. Q. Could you tell the date you left fishing at the Grand Banks to go into Saint John's for bait this year 2—A. I could not exactly say. *. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2339 Q. Can't you remember?—A. I don’t know if I could exactly tell you Il OW. Q. Do you remember the date you got back after being in there?—A. We got back the 24th of last month. Q. Well, now, you left Saint John's the 24th September ?—A. We got back the 24th. Q. Well, now, do you remember what time you left Saint John's 3—A. I left on the 22d September. Q. How long were you in Saint John's 3–A. Well, I have been— Q. On that occasion I mean. How long had you been there ?—A. I had been there two days. Q. Well, how long had you been coming from the Banks into Saint John's 3–A. About 36 hours. Q. That altogether makes five and a half days. Then it takes you five º a half days?—A. Yes; and then I have been three weeks looking or bait. * Q. But I am speaking of this occasion ?—A. Yes. Q. You were about five and a half days 3—A. Yes. Q. You are clear upon that point %—A. Yes. * Q. Now, how came you to swear just now that the shortest time you were in there was seven days?—A. Well, I didn’t say. I said I have been over three weeks. Q. You said you were thirty-six hours coming in from the Banks!—A. I said I was thirty-six hours coming in from the Banks. I didn’t go directly to Saint John's then. But then when I got my bait, when I left I got it at Saint John’s; it was salt bait. I was looking for fresh bait and could not get it. We gave up hopes of getting fresh bait, and then went to Saint John's and got salt bait. - Q. Then you were not correct when you said you were thirty-six hours?—A. Well, you didn’t ask me. You asked me in a different way. You asked me how long I was coming in from the Banks, and I told you. But I was longer than that looking for bait, because I didn't go directly to Saint John's when I came looking for bait. When I gave up every other place, I came to Saint John's. Q. You were thirty-six hours going to St. John's, and you were two days in St. John's 3–A. I was not at that time. Q. I was only speaking of one voyage and kept you to one particular trip. You told me you were clear it took five and a half days for the trip.–A. I didn’t say such a word, that it took me five and a half on this trip. Q. Do I understand you now that you were not correct in making the Statement that it took thirty-six hours to go into St. John’s and that you remained in St. John's two days and took two days to go out again }–A. I left the bank and run for St. John's and I have been in there and got through my business before I left St. John's, and went all round the coast looking for fresh bait. - Q. What business had you in St. John's 7–A. We wanted to find out where we could get bait. Q. Had you any other business?—A. Not anything large. Q. How long did you remain in St. John's to find out where you could get bait 3–A. We came in on Saturday evening about dark and lay there until Monday morning. - Q. Then where did you go to ?—A. To a place called Portugal Cove. Q. When do you go there ?—A. We were there a night or so. We got there some time about four o'clock and were there until next morning. 2340 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. You didn’t get bait there ?—A. No. Q. Where then did you go?—A. Up the shore. Q. To what place 3–A. Broad Cove. Q. Did you get bait there 3—A. No. Q. How long did you remain 3–A. We went there in the morning and were away next evening. Q. Where then 7–A. To the northward, to Bonavista. Q. Did you get bait there ?–A. No. Q. How long did you remain there 3–A. Two days. Q. Where did you go from there 2–A. To Heart's Content. Q. Did you get bait there?—A. No ; we staid there three days. Q. Where did you go then 7––A. We worked back to St. John's. We worked on shore down along, trying different places. We tried the coves inside and along shore. Q. When did you get back to St. John's 3–-A. The day of the week 2 I could not exactly tell you. ,” Q. How long did you remain there then 7—A. Two days. Q. Did you get fresh bait there 3—A. No ; we took salt bait. Q. What detained you that long getting salt bait 3–A. Well, the first evening we were in there they caught a few squid, a very few, and we remained there until next morning to see whether they would catch, thinking probably they might strike in and we could get some. Next morning they didn’t get any, so we took salt Squid, and the wind was kind of ahead, so we didn’t go out until next day. Q. How long did it take you around all this coasting voyage 2—A. It was about three weeks from the time we left until we got back. Q. Can you tell me when you left the Banks 7–A. No. - Q. Now, don’t you know a great number of harbors and places where you could get bait between St. John’s and Portugal Cove?—A. There have been vessels in every harbor from St. Peter's to St. John's and didn’t get any. - .* Q. American vessels have been in every harbor from St. Peter's to St. John’s and haven’t got any bait 3—A. Not any fresh bait. They were looking for fresh bait. I don’t know but some of them might have got it. & Q. What time during this year did those vessels go into all those harbors between St. Peter's and St. John’s and get no bait 3–A. From the middle of last month. - Q. From the middle of September to the first of this month—during fifteen days?—A. Well, some there might be from the first of the month; there might be some there. * Q. That is American vessels in all the ports between St. Peter's and St. John’s and got no bait 2 Were you in any of those ports yourself?— A. No ; I have been there and to the northward of St. John's, Q. How do you know they were there ?—A. I have seen vessels go- ing along there. Q. How many have you seen ?—A. Five or six. Q. Can you name one?—A. There was one captain said he had been up and down all along the shore, from St. Peter's up and down, and didn’t get any fresh bait. Q. Where did you fall in with him 7–A. In St. John's. Q. Was that the first time or the last 7–A. The last time. -Q. Did he take fresh bait or salt”—A. I was not in his company all i. time. I could not correctly tell you whether he got salt or fresh ait. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2341 Q. Now, you have detailed your expedition in for bait this year; you were in also last year 3–A. Yes. Q. Can you tell me the time you left the fishing ground last year to go in for bait 3–A. No ; I can tell you the time I was gone. Q. Can you tell me the port to which you went 7–A. St. John's. Q. Direct from the Banks 3–A. Yes. -- Q. You can’t tell the time you left the Banks 7–A. No. Q. How long did it take you to go in 7—A. About 38 hours, I sup- pose. Q. Did you get bait in St. John's 3–A. Yes. Q. Fresh 7–A. Yes. - Q. Did you return immediately to the fishing ground 7–A. Yes. Q. How long were you in St. John's 2—A. I was there five days. Q. You remained in St. John’s five days on that occasion last year 3– A. Yes. Q. Were you detained by no other cause than the procuring of bait 3– A. That is all. ! - Q. Was there no bait there to be had 3–A. There was, but they could not catch enough at once, and we had to wait for the morning and even- ing catch, and buy what they would bring aboard. Q. Did you go in the harbor or remain in Freshwater Bay ?—A. The vessel remained in Freshwater Bay. * b Q. Why did she remain there ?—A. That is where they catch the ait. Q. You did not go into St. John's; was it not to avoid paying the light- dues 3–A. No ; it was not. Q. State whether it was that or not.—A. No ; I don’t know if it was that ; it was not that. * Q. Did you pay light-dues 3–A. No. Q. How long did it take you to get out to the fishing grounds at the Banks 3—A. I could not say. Q. Cannot you remember how long—38 hours ?—A. It took nine days from the day we left to when we got back. / Q. Did you make any other trip to Newfoundland for bait last year?— à Not from the Banks. We took bait from Cape Breton when going €I'ê. Q. The only two voyages you made in for bait since you have been master are the one just referred to, when you went round to Bonavista and got salt bait, and one in 1876, when you anchored in Fresh- Yºr Bay, outside of St. John's, and got bait and came out again 3–A. €S. - Q. Those were the only two trips you went in for fresh bait, except- ing in Fortune Bay 3—A. That is all. Q. Fresh bait, I believe, is very superior to salt bait for taking fish?— A. If it was on the Bank, it is; but when you have to spend half your time looking for it, it is not. Q. Then, if you had plenty of fresh bait you would consider it far su- perior to salt bait for catching fish 7–A. Yes. Q. Did you ever get any ice in St. John's 2—A. No. Q. Where did you get your ice 3–A. Which time 3 Q. At any time.—A. We got ice in St. John's the last trip. Q. You got ice in St. John's last year 7–A. Yes. Q. Had you no other business in St. John's besides that of getting bait 3–A. No other business. - Q. Did not your men jig bait themselves 3—A. No. 2342 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Have you ever jigged bait there either when captain or hand?—A, I never jigged any bait in St. John's. Q. Did any of your crew 2–A. No ; nor any of my crew. Q. Have any of your crew jigged squid in any other port than St. John's 3–A. No ; not that I know of. While they were with me I never saw them jig for squid. Q. You always employed others to get bait 3—A. They come along- side, and we buy bait from them. Q. You employ them to catch bait for you ?—A. They come alongside and they catch it. - - Q. Do they come alongside with squid to sell, or do they come and ask what quantity of bait you want, and you tell them and they go and catch it 3–A. They come alongside with bait. They never come near except with bait. - Q. They never come to ask whether you want bait or not ?—A. No. Q. How often has that occurred that they have come alongside with bait 2–A. That is with squid. Q. How often has it occurred that they have come alongside with squid 2–A. All the times I have ever been there for bait, they have come alongside, and have had the bait—squid—in their boats. Q. You got salt bait that year 7—A. Salt Squid. Q. Last year you got fresh Squid 3–A. Fresh bait. Q. And you were five days in St. John's before you got it?—A. Yes; waiting till they caught it. Q. Do you mean to say that they did not come on board to know what Quantity of bait you wanted ?–A. They came on board the first morn- ing I was there and had bait in their boats. - Q. And then you told them what quantity of fish you wanted, and they went and caught it 3–A. They had bait to sell and I bought what they had. Q. Then you told them what quantity you wanted, and they went and caught it 3–A. Yes. At last they had more than I wanted. - Q. Bait was very abundant %–A. I did not want all the bait they had caught, the last morning I was there. Q. That is the only time you got fresh squid from the people there?— A. Yes; the last time last year. Q. You got it the year before ?—A. No. Q. That was the only time you got fresh squid 7–A. I got no fresh Squid that trip, but on the first trip. Q. I thought you were in for bait only once that year?—A. I told you I was in St. John's four times this year. Q. You told me you were in Fortune Bay.—A. Twice in Fortune Bay and twice on the coast. - Q. You have been more than once in St. John's this year 3–A. Once in what I call St. John’s. • Q. Have you been at any other time on the coast besides at Fortune Bay ?—A. Yes. Q. Where did you go?—A. In Bay of Bulls. Q. When were you in Bay of Bulls?—A. I went in there the last day of July. 3. Q. When did you leave the Banks to go there ?—A. I was right from home. Q. You went from home to the Bay of Bulls?—A. Yes. Q. And got bait there, in how long a time 2—A. They caught it the same day we went in there. - Q. And you proceeded at once to the Banks 3–A. Yes, AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2343 Q. How long was it before you got on the fishing grounds?—A. About two days. * * Q. You got the bait the first day you went in 3–A. Yes. Q. Then you were only three days altogether in getting bait and pro- Ceeding to the Banks 7–A. Yes; I had come from home then. Q. How do you reconcile that with the statement you made that the Shortest time in which you got bait was nine days 3–A. There is a dif- ference. I was asked the time it took from leaving the Banks to get back. I did not go there from the Banks. Q. You draw a distinction between leaving home and going to New- foundland to get bait and going from the Banks there for bait 3—A.. I was asked what time was taken between leaving the Banks to get bait and getting back again. I don’t know but that I was three weeks from the time I left home till I got there. Q. In 1875 you were a hand. Do you recollect what time you left the Banks to go into the coast for bait 2–A. No; I do not. Q. Do you remember how often you went in 7—A. Once, I think. Q. Do you recollect to what place you went?—A. To Fortune Bay. Q. That was the only part of the coast to which you went for bait in 1875, and you went there but once %–A. That is all. Q. In 1874, how often were you on the coast of Newfoundland for bait 3–A. Once, I think. *s Q. Those were the two years you were a hand 3–A. Yes. Q. How was it you said you were 10 or 12 times into that coast for bait before you were master, and six times since you were master 7—A. I did not mean in Newfoundland getting bait. I was asked how often I took fresh bait. Q. It is, then, not correct as you have stated, that you were into New- foundland for bait ten or twelve times before you were master. Did you State that or not ?—A. I don’t think I did—that I went into Newfound- land that number of times for bait... Q. As a matter of fact, you were there once in 1874, once in 1875, once in 1876, and once this year. Is that correct º–A. I have been twice this year; once in 1876. Q. Then you were there once in 1874, once in 1875, once in 1876, and twice this year?—A. Yes. t Q. That makes five times you went on the coast of Newfoundland for bait 2–A. Five times altogether. I have been four times this year, twice for squid and twice for herring. Q. You were there once in 1874, once in 1875, once in 1876, and four times in 1877. Is that a fact 7–A. That is the fact. r Q. Any other statement you may have made in regard to the times you have been in for bait is incorrect?—A. I was asked how often I had been in for fresh bait. - Q. You were asked how often you had been into Newfoundland for fresh bait 2–A. I did not understand that it was only Newfoundland. Q. You were there once in 1874, once in 1875, once in 1876, and four times in 1877. That is a correct statement 3–A. Yes; that is a correct Statement. - Q. Any other statement you made as to the number of times you Went into Newfoundland for bait is incorrect 7–A. Yes. 2344 AWARD OF THF FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 31. STEPHEN J. MARTIN recalled on behalf of the Government of the United States. By Mr. Dana: Question. I have learned since you were on the stand, what I did not know before, that you have been engaged in halibut fishing?—Answer, Yes. - Q. During the time you were in the Bloomer, were you halibut fish. ing 3—A. Yes. Q. Where did you fish 7–A. Part of the time at the George's, but the biggest part of the time, seven years out of the ten or eleven years, }. fished in different parts of the Bay of Fundy, from Yarmouth to Seal Sland. Q. That includes all the region about, I suppose. You have heard Something about Cape Sable Island 3—A. Yes. Q. During time you were fishing in that region, were you fishing deep sea or inshore ?—A. In deep water; never within fifteen miles of the shore. Sometimes we sighted Yarmouth light or Seal Island light. Q. Did you ever see any other persons fishing as close inshore as three miles?—A. We were not near enough to see. Q. Did you go in at all 3–A. Twice; once into Bryer Island after herring, and once into Yarmouth after alewives. Q. When you were at Bryer Island, did you find any other fishermen there?—A. Nobody but ourselves. - Q. Did you speak with any, either going or coming 3—A. No. Q. Did you get your bait at home 2—A. We went to Bryer Island to try and get some bait, but did not get any. We got 400 or 500 herrings and came right away. Q. Did you take bait from home?—A. Always. Q. Is it the practice among the American fishermen to procure the bait from home?—A. Yes; when going only that short distance, they always take their bait from home. - Q. As far as your information extends, you know nothing of any hali- but which is not taken outside in deep Water?—A. No. By Mr. Weatherbe: Q. What was the last year you fished 3–A. 1861. Q. Where did you fish 7–A. We caught one trip about 15 miles west of Yarmouth light. We could see the light on a clear night. I § Erom Yarmouth and to the west?—A. Yes; and towards Seal sland. - Q. Yarmouth was farthest you went west on that coast 3–A. Yes; unless We went up to Bryer Island. - Q. You fished altogether west of Yarmouth 3–A. Yes. Q. You only fished at Yarmouth and west of Yarmouth º–A. Some- times we would go as far off as Seal Island and Brown's Bank. We have been eastward on that coast. g Q. You never tried inshore fishing ?—A. No. - Q. Did you ever land at Sable Island 3—A. Never in my life. Q. You never fished there in sixteen years 7–A. No. Q. You never fished for halibut lately 7–A. Not since 1861. Q. You stated, when you were here before, that halibut was a deep-Sea h 3—A. We sometimes fished in 75 or 80 fathoms. Q. You did not make anything out of halibut fishing?—A. No. fis AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2345 Q. Lately there has been a good deal of money made out of halibut fishing in the Gulf of St. Lawrence?—A. Not in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Q. Do you know anything about halibut fishing in the gulf º–A. No. Q. You never heard of it 3––A. No. 1% Not off Anticosti ?—A. Not to my knowledge. I have heard tell Of it. Q. You never heard of any halibut fishing except as deep-sea fishing?—— A. I have heard of a few halibut being caught down at Miquelon and St. Pierre. Q. Sixteen years ago 2–A. Yes. Q. Since that you have heard nothing about it'—A. No ; I never paid much attention to it. I might have heard about it, but never gave it any attention. - Q. Do you know that it had lately been discovered that it was a shore- fishery?—A. No. & ſº Q. You never fished any since 1860?–A. No. No. 33. EZRA TURNER, of Isle of Haut, Deer Isle, State of Maine, fisherman, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. * By Mr. Foster: Question. You live on the south part of Deer Isle, on Penobscot Bay, and in the State of Maine?—Answer. Yes. Q. And the name of your place of residence is Isle of Haut?—A. Yes. Q. How far is that from Mount Desert 2–A. Twenty miles. Q. How old are you?—A.. I was 64, 12th of last March. Q. When were you first in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence %—A. About 1829. - * Q. What for ?—A. I was for codfish that trip. Q. When were you first in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence after mack. erel?—A. In 1831. Q. How many years have you been fishing in the Gulf of Saint Law. rence for mackerel ?–A.. I have been from that time till 1865. Q. Thirty-five years 2—A. Yes. º Q. When were you first skipper ?—A. In 1831. Q. Of what schooner º–A. The Porpoise. Q. You were pretty young when you were first skipper ?—A. There Were younger skippers than I Was. & Q. How old were you ?—A. About nineteen. Q. How many years were you in the Porpoise ?—A. I was in her 17 years. Q. In succession ?—A. Yes. Q. Where was she from ?—A. She belonged to the town of Deer Isle, when Isle of Haute and Deer Isle were one. Q. She belonged to the place where you live 3—A. Yes. Q. Where did she pack out 2—A. The first three years I fitted and packed at Isle of Haute, and the next fourteen years I fitted and packed in Gloucester. Q. State to the Commission what was your principal fishing-ground for mackerel in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.—A. I have been all over it, but the principal ground is Banks Bradley and Orphan and the Magda- len Islands. Late in the fall down at Margaree there is considerable hovering about there among the fleet. A- 2346 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Have you caught mackerel within three miles of the shore any- Where, and, if so, name all the places, and tell the Commission all you know about the extent of the fishing at those places 2—A. I got 90 bar- rels one day. I did not judge myself anything more than three miles out, and I don’t think I was. I think I was within three miles of the land; when we hove to after we had done fishing, we were six or seven miles off. The wind was right off land. Q. Where was that ?—A. At Margaree. Aside of that, I don’t recol- lect getting a dozen barrels of mackerel at any place inshore round the whole bay. Q. In one day, do you mean, or altogether ?—A. In any one time. I might have picked up fifty barrels, aside of these wash-barrels, inside Of the line all round the bay. - - Q. So far as you have observed fishing within three miles of the shore, where is the most of it done in the gulf 3–A. At Margaree Island, the most I have seen done. It is the only place there is any fish inshore that I know of. Q. Why is that ? Explain.—A. When the fish come down out of the bay in the fall we calculate that those which go through the Gut of Canso strike Margaree, unless the wind blows from the south and then they go round Cape North. They strike down to Margaree. Sometimes We can get them half way across to East Point, and afterwards two-thirds of the way from there towards Margaree, and if there is a heavy north Wind it drives them near the shore. I never saw them caught inside of one mile or two miles, for the land there is very high, and one mile does not look much distance where the land is so high. Q. When you speak of fishing off Margaree do you know if there is any fishing between the island and mainland there 2–A. I never saw a mackerel caught there, but I don’t know that it has not been done. Q. When you measure distances do you measure them from the main- land or the island 7–A. From the island. Q. Then you mean inshore of the island 3–A. Yes. I consider the island land. , Q. Have you ever fished off Prince Edward Island 3–A. Yes. I have fished all round the east side wherever anybody fished. Q. Did you fish within three miles of the shore there ?—A. No. It is a rare thing that ever you get mackerel within the three miles. When they come within three miles they rise in schools, and we never calcu- late to do much out of them, but from four to six or seven miles off is the common fishing ground there. ~, Q. Did you ever go to Seven Islands in the gulf º–A. Yes, I have been there three times. I never got 20 barrels of mackerel. Q. How near inshore did you try there?—A. I tried close in there and I did not find any. They used to catch them broad off and then the story was that some vessels caught them close in. Some of the Eng- lish boats told me they had done well close in to St. Anne. Q. St. Anne is on the other side of the river ?—A. It is on the South side, right across. Q. Did you ever try seining for mackerel in Bay St. Lawrence %–A. Yes. I took a Seine once and went up to Seven Islands, and from there down through the Straits to Anticosti, down by Mingan, up through the inside of Mecatina, to St. Augustine and Dog Island, and from there to Old Fort. I was ordered to go and stop there. Q. Where is Old Fort 3–A. It is on the Labrador coast. Q. What success had you in seining 2—A. I never got a scale. I went from there to Five Islands, Newfoundland, Bonne Bay, and over to the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 234.7 Magdalen Islands, and got there the first of September, and landed my Seines and boats without one scale. | Q. What year was that ?—A. I cannot tell that. It was when I was in the Blondel. Q. Was it 10, 15, or 20 years ago 3–A. It was 15 years ago. Q. That season after first September did you try catching mackerel in the usual way, with hook and line?—A. Yes; all I got. Q. How many did you get 2—A. 270 barrels. Q. Where ?—A. At the Magdalen Islands and broad off New London and about 30 or 40 barrels southeast of East Point. Q. What was the last year you fished in the Gulf of St. Lawrence 3– A.. I think it was 1865. Q. You came from home here on a request by letter or telegram. Did 'you bring any books or memoranda with you ?—A. No. Q. You have not any means of fixing dates ?—A. No. I did not know for what I was wanted, or what you were going to do with me. Q. Do you recollect being in the Gulf of St. Lawrence once when there was a cutter there, and the limits within which you were to fish were pointed out 7–A. I do, well. \ Q. Tell me what the cutter was 2—A. I cannot tell her name, because there was none on her, but I heard the name of her. The captain was Captain Daly. A Q. Where did she come from ?—A. From Halifax. He sent for me to come on board. Q. I should like to fix the time as nearly as possible. You hardly remember the year?—A. I cannot ; I was in Highland Lass that year, I am pretty sure. - Q. Do you remember whether it was before the Reciprocity Treaty 3– A. It must have been. Q. The Reciprocity Treaty began in 1854; then it must have been twenty-odd years ago?—A. Yes. Q. Describe what sort of a cutter it was, where it came from, where you saw it, and tell the whole story.—A. He gave a general invitation to all American skippers to come on board and see where their limits to fish were. There were 30 or 40 sail of vessels round there, but they all cleared out, except one or two, as soon as he came in. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Where did that occur 7—A. In Port Hood. - WITNESS (to Mr. Foster). I staid there. The captain sent his boat down alongside a vessel which was there (I forget the name) and told the skipper he wanted him to come on board. He went to another one, and then came round to me and said, “The captain wants you to go on board.” I went on board. The captain told me what his orders were from Halifax, and he showed me his marks on the chart. I well recol- lect three marks. One was from Margaree to Cape St. George, and then a straight line from East Point to Cape St. George, and then an- other straight line from East Point to North Cape. The captain said, “If you come within three miles of these lines, fishing or attempting to fish, I will consider you a prize.” Q. That is to say, you were excluded from three miles drawn from point to point across the Bend of Prince Edward Island 3–A. Yes. He made those lines from the shore marks. Q. I want to ask you generally whether you regard the Magdalen Islands as a safe fishing-ground 3—A. Yes ; as safe as any place in the bay. 2348 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. It is rather boisterous there when there is a wind?—A. Where is it not % Q. How could you protect yourself?—A. There is no wind, but you can make a lee under the Islands, because you can go all round them. Q. EIow about the north shore of Prince Edward Island 7–A. We Consider it a very bad place. Q. Why?—A. You are embayed, and the tide sets in there so from the easterly that it is almost impossible to beat out. When the wind has blown two hours the sea is so sharp a vessel can do nothing. Q. Do you regard that portion of the mackerel fishery which lies Within three miles of the shore in the Gulf of St. Lawrence as important and valuable to American fishermen 3–A. There is a very small part of the mackerel caught within three miles of the land there or anywhere Or at the Magdalen Islands, that I know of, and I have always fished with all the fleet and vessels there, although at times I have seen good fishing at Margaree. Sometimes at Margaree the vessels fish within three miles of the land. That is all the important inshore fishing I know of in the whole bay. - Q. In regard to the herring fishery at Grand Manan, have you been in that neighborhood after herring 3—A. Yes, I suppose I was the man who introduced that business. Q. How many years ago was that ?—A. That is 25 years ago, I guess. Q. Did you go there to catch herring or to buy them ?—A. That is the Way all our vessels do; they go and buy them from the inhabitants there who fish the herring and freeze them. Q. Do you know of any herring being caught by American fishing- Vessels in British waters about Grand Manan 3–A. No; I never knew any American vessel go there to fish for"them. I have known the inhab- itants there to charter American vessels and the skipper, and to give the Vessel such a part and the skipper such a part—say they would give them two shares. The vessel would lie in the harbor and they would fish the herring, freeze them, and sell them. If there were four parties they would reckon one share for the vessel, one share for the captain, Which with the others would make six shares. They several times Wanted to charter me to come down in the winter. Q. Have you ever seen American vessels there with herring nets?— A. I never did. Our nets and our fishermen cannot compete with Nova Scotia fishermen for herring. • Q. Why not ?—A. Their nets are finer and they understand the hang- ing of them better. I have sold nets there and the people have taken them and Seamed them over, and the nets would do as well again as they did when I had them. There is no American I ever knew or heard of who went there to catch herring. Q. When were you there last 7–A. I was down there last year, last Winter. I only stopped a little while. Q. You have now been speaking of the frozen herring”—A. Yes; they are frozen herring. Q. Have you ever known any American vessels to fish for herring to Salt or Smoke in that vicinity ?—A, No ; not there. Q. Eastport and Campobello are close to each other ?—A. Yes. Q. And the line between the two countries, Campobello being British and Eastport American, is the center of the channel, is it not ?—A. Yes. Q. Which has the most inhabitants, Eastport or Campobello 7–A. If you take the whole of Campobello there is not much difference, but Eastport is the more thickly peopled. There are three villages in Cam- pobello. The people told me they had no trouble over the fishing, and AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2349 I talked with them particularly about it. They say when the pollock are on Our side their boats are here, and when on their side our boats are there, so they never have any trouble about the fishing-grounds. Q. Do you know of any fishing done in boats there except pollock. fishing ?—A. No. Q. What kind of fish for mercantile purpose is pollock; is it a valua- ble or a cheap fish 7–A. It is a cheap fish. Not so valuable as cod. Q. What do they sell for per pound?—A. They go from $1.25 to $3 per quintal. Q. Within the last few years?—A. Yes. They make a good deal of oil ; they are well livered. Q. And that pollock fishery, as you understood, is common to the boats of the two places?—A. That is what they told me when I saw the boats there together. Q. They make a reciprocity treaty for themselves?—A. That is as I understood it. At Eastport the people told me that if herring were at Grand Manan they would go over, and if they were on their side the people of Grand Manan would come over and fish in West Bay. They never had any trouble. * Q. Is your information about the State of Maine sufficiently exten- Sive to enable you to state whether the fisheries of Maine, cod and mack- erel particularly, have been increasing or decreasing, say for the last ten years 3–A. I should say they have been decreasing. Q. Explain.—A. The town I live in once had twenty sail of vessels Over 50 tons; now it has not got one. - Q. What did these vessels do 3–A. Fished for codfish and mackerel. Q. Did the same vessels do one business one part of the year and the other business the other part 3–A. Yes. - Q. Do you include the whole of Deer Isle in that or merely your town 3–A. I can tell you for the whole of Deer Isle. There used to be fishing firms there that owned and fitted out vessels. There were three firms at Burnt Cove, Deer Isle. There were two firms at Green's Landing, Charles Eden and S. Green. The Warrens had twenty sail of vessels. Now there is not one solitary fishing-stand in the whole town of Deer Isle, and no one fishes for pollock or mackerel, unless it be the two Webbs. The Webbs have three vessels left. The Warrens have one or two vessels left. Charles Eaton has not a vessel. There is a not a fleet or a barrel in Burnt Cove. Q. Take other towns on the coast which you know of in the vicinity of Booth Bay ?—A. I am not so well posted in regard to Booth Bay of late years. A new firm from Cape Cod has gone there, and they say is starting business there. I know the fishing business went down there greatly. McClentick, one of the principal fish-dealers, told me that it Was about played out with them. Q. What is the Cape Cod firm fishing for ?—A. They are fishing for everything, I believe. They fit out vessels, and buy fish, herring and mackerel. Q. Give me the name of the firm.—A. I cannot remember it. Q. Are there any other towns you recollect about 3–A. Yes; there is the town of Vinalhaven. There used to be 50 sail of vessels there, and it was one of the greatest places for codfish-making in the State. Now there is not one vessel goes out of the harbor where there used to be a fleet. There are four or five vessels belong to the island and scat- tered all round. I believe George Hopkins is the only one in that town who has made codfish this year. Q. 1)o you know anything about Portland 3–A. I have not been at 23.50 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Portland for seven or eight years. But I know about Bucksport and Castine; they have broken up in regard to fishing. Q. They have stopped the business %–A. All except a few barrels. Q. What did Castine used to do 3–A. Castine used to be the main- stay of all fishing. Everybody went there to fit out, and it used to own a good many Bankers itself, and it used to supply vessels with salt and everything else. Now the salt-stores are all gone and the ves- sels are all gone. I don’t know of one vessel that has gone out of Cas- tine to the Banks this year, and there used to be 70, 80, or 90 sail of Bankers fit out there yearly. There are more Bankers going out of Bucksport than Castine, because there are none from Castine, but noth- ing to what they used to be. - Q. You remember the old bounty system 3–A. I think I do. Q. What was it, and what was the effect of its withdrawal 3–A. It used to cost about nine shillings to the dollar to get it. Q. How do you mean 7–A. They would get an old vessel, and hire a crew to go in her, and the wages and expenses would eat up all the bounty and considerably more. - Q. What do you mean by getting an old vessel ?—A. When the bounty was on, anybody who had an old vessel would let a man take her for nothing. If you had an old vessel you would say to me, “I will give you her to use this season if you will give me the bounty.” The earning of the bounty would be no expense to you, and if I could make the vessel earn anything I would get it. That is the way bounty catch- ing was carried on where I live. Q. Would not that increase the number of vessels by keeping old ves- sels afloat?—A. Yes; vessels which ought to have been dead. That is the way the bounty system was carried on in our locality; but there were vessels which earned the bounty and the bounty helped them. Y Q. The bounty was given exclusively on cod-fishing vessels"—A. €S. Q. Did those old vessels which went cod-fishing, partly induced to do So by the bounty, go after mackerel any part of the year 3—A. They used to go after everything. Q. º not during the four months they were earning their bounty " —A. NO. - Q. The rest of the year they went fishing for everything 2—A. Yes; they did not go a great distance off. r Q. Was the effect of withdrawing the bounty to diminish the number of vessels and to place old and poor vessels out of employment 3–A. Yes; old vessels that were not good for anything. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. A question was asked you whether fishing on the coast of Maine had increased or diminished, and you said it had decreased; and you spoke of the number of vessels. Where did those vessels usually fish at the time to which you referred ?–A. Our vessels used to go to Lab. rador, Brown's Banks, and Western Banks, and all round. Q. Along the whole coast 2—A. Yes. - Q. And to the Grand Banks 3–A. Some, but very few; I went to the Grand Banks in one vessel. • By Mr. Foster: Q. Did your vessels come to the gulf for mackerel ?–A. No ; not the Old bounty catchers. Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2351 By Mr. Weatherbe: Q. You have named all the places where the vessels fished 3—A. The bounty catchers ? Yes. Q. You say the effect of the bounty was, as far as your personal acquaintance with it goes, that people had to pay about nine shillings on the dollar to get it 2–A. Yes. - Q. The vessels you spoke of as fishing from the several towns on your coast—where did they fish” Did you think Sir Alexander Galt's ques- tion referred to the bounty vessels 7–A. I thought the bounty catchers were meant. The other vessels fished all Over the shores. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Fishing for cod or mackerel ?—A. Both. I mean the firms which have carried on the fishing. by Sir Alexander Galt : Q. I had no reference whatever to the bounty system. I want to know where those vessels you spoke of as sailing out of all the ports on your coast usually fished—whether they fished in the gulf or on your own coast 3—A. All over the whole coast. Q. Everywhere ?—A. Yes; everywhere in the gulf, about home, and everywhere else. The same as they fish now. By Mr. Weatherbe: Q. How far south of your place do they fish 3–A. For Spring mack- ereling they go as far as Cape May. - Q. Those vessels you speak of went and fished in the same places as the Gloucester fishermen fished 3—A. Exactly. Q. And they failed of late years 7–A. Yes. Q. And your coast fishery has failed of late years 2—A. Yes. Q. Generally 7–A. Yes. - Q. Do you know the reason the fishery on your coast has failed; is it overfishing 3–A. I always thought it cost all the fish were Worth to get them, anyhow. Q. Has your fishery diminished of late years?—A. It was nothing but unlimited credit that ever kept the fishermen up, I contend. Q. Then their credit failed 3–A. Yes. Q. Is that the only reason 3—A. I don’t know what other reason there is. That is reason enough, is it not ? They are not able to carry it on. They cannot make it profitable. Q. Is that the only reason you have to give 3—A. Yes. -- Q. That want of credit has stopped them 3–A. The credit has stopped and the business has stopped. There is no profit in the business, they say. That is what has made it stop. * Q. There used to be a profit in the business for years and years?—A. I don’t know about that. Q. Was there never any capital in the business?—A. There was some. Q. For years and years there was capital in the business? For twenty years º–A. Yes. Q. There was capital in the business twenty years, was there 3—A. I don’t think I understand you. r Q. Was there capital invested to carry on the fishing business on the coast of Maine 3—A. I suppose there was, or else I don't know how it could be carried on. Q. For a large number of years?—A. Yes. Q. For 20 years ?—A. Yes. 2352. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. For the last five or six years there has been no capital in it 3–A. Yes; for about the last 10 years. - . . Q. The fishing has been given up 2—A. Because they did not find it profitable; there is no profit in it. Q. How is it they have failed 7–A. I cannot tell you more than there is no profit in the business. - Q. For twenty years they found a profit in it?—A. I don’t know about that. Q. Don’t you know it?—A. They did not show it; if they made money they would be likely to show it in some way or other. Q. When there was a large number of fishermen or firms carrying on the fishery business during those 20 years, and had capital invested in it, do you know whether they made money out of it?—A. No ; I cannot. swear as to what other people made. Q. For the last 10 years it has not been profitable %–A. I know the business has all gone down. Q. Are the fish to be caught there now, and were they of late years?— A. They fish on the same ground now as they did then. Q. Do you know that the fisheries have failed 3–A. I don’t know. I don’t Suppose they have. Q. Do you know anything about it?—A. I know as much as anybody. Q. How do you know as much as anybody ?—A. I am in the way of knowing what vessels bring in at Gloucester, Booth Bay, and Mount Desert. Q. For twenty years there was capital invested in the fishing busi- ness?—A. Yes. - Q. For the last 10 years the capital has been withdrawn 2–A. With- drawn or lost. * - f Q. Do you know why?—A, No. ~. Q. Can you tell me, in regard to those 10 years, when the capital was invested, anything about the statistics of the catches and vessels 3–A. NO. Q. For the last ten years can you tell anything about the statistics of the catches or vessels 3–A. I don’t keep books, and I cannot tell you how much a man lost or gained. Q. Have you been engaged in the fishing business yourself?—A. I have not been engaged in cod fishing, and not much mackereling. No. 33. * , WEDNESDAY, October 3, 1877. The Conference met. - The cross-examination of EZRA TURNER, of Isle of Haut, Deer Isle, State of Maine, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, was resumed. By Mr. Weatherbe: Question. You are acquainted with a place called Lubec }–Answer. . I am. *. - Q. I will give you the names of some places and ask you if you are acquainted with them : Lubec, Perry, Pembroke, Eastport, Cutler, Machias, Campobello, West Isles, Point Lepreau.—A.. I am acquainted with Point Lepreau, Cutler, Eastport, and Lubec. Machias I was never in but Once. - - Q How often have you been in the other places 2—A. I cannot tell you ; a great many. - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2353 Q. Recently, how often ?—A.. I have not been there these three years. Q. In any of them 3–A. Yes; I was in Cutler two years ago. Q. Since the Washington Treaty came into operation have you been there 3––A. When did that come into operation ? I was in Cutler two years ago; I have not been in Eastport these three years. - Q. Can you give the Commission any statistics in regard to the fish- eries at those places 3–A. I cannot. * Q. Have you taken any pains to obtain and make up statistics 2—A. No; that is as to the quantity caught, you mean. Q. Anything at all with regard to the fisheries. Have you made up statistics º–A. No. Q. None whatever ?—A. No. Q. You have spoken of Grand Manan 3–A. Yes. Q. When were you there last 7–A. Two years ago, I think. Q. How long were you there ?—A. I was there a fortnight. Q. How many years were you there previously 7–A. Grand Manan is a place I often go to. Q. How often have you been there since the Washington Treaty came into force 3—A. I cannot say. Q. Give the number of times as near as you can 3–A. I was at Grand Manan two years ago, and staid a fortnight. I have been there off and on these fifty years. - Q. Take the last four years, how long have you been there altogether; one month ?—A. No ; I never staid a month there. Q. Altogether, during the last four years, have you been there three Weeks?—A. Yes. * - Q. During the last ten years how long have you spent there ?—A. I Cannot tell. - Q. Can you give any idea º–A. I cannot remember. Q. We have gone to a great deal of trouble in regard to getting statistics of Grand Manan fishery and the fishery on that coast; I want to know what you know about it 7–A. I have been going off and on to Grand Manan, sometimes staying one day and one night, and sometimes three or four days, and once two weeks. That was the longest time I ever stopped on one occasion at Grand Manan. Q. Generally you only staid one day, and went away the next day ?— A. Yes. Q. Did you take any opportunity while there to gather any statistics with regard to the fisheries?—A.. I knew how they were doing in fish- I Ilg. Q. Do you know how many boats they use 2—A. They use boats and vessels clear round there. Q. Did you, during the period you were there, make inquiries; and, if so, to what extent, and from whom?—A. As to how many boats were there? - ! Q. As to statistics about the fisheries 3–A. No. Q. Anything at all?—A. No ; I could see for myself. Q. Did you make any inquiries whatever ?—A. Yes; about the fish- ing, from Mr. Caskill, the largest merchant there. Q. And with regard to the number of boats engaged 2–A.. I did not ask the number of boats engaged. Q. You did make inquiries, from whom 3–A. Mr. Caskill, of Grand Manan. Q. He resides there now %–A. He is there now. Q. On what subject did you make inquiries?—A.. I asked him how the fishing was this year, and he said very bad as yet. 148 F. 2354 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What year was that ?—A. Four years ago; it was in July I was there. - Q. Give any other inquiries you made and tell me from whom you made them.—A. I did not make any inquiries about the fishing from anybody else. º - - Q. You asked no other question but what you have said 7–A. Not from him. Q. From any person else 7–A. From John Beales, who left Moose-a- beck and went down there, bought a place, and staid there and fished. Q. What did you ask him 7–A. How he had done in fishing, and he said a good deal better than when he was up at Moose-a-beck. It was fishing in a small boat. - Q. That was all you asked him 7–A. Yes. Q. Did you make any other inquiries 7–A. I don’t recollect that I did. Q. Do you know Walter B. McLaughlin, fishery overseer, Grand Manan 7–A. I do not. Q. You have heard of him 3–A. I don’t think I ever heard that name Bow long has he been overse(r 7 Q. A great many years. Ełe is county councilor, captain of the militia, justice of the peace, and light-house keeper; he was born in Nova Scotia, and resided all his life at Grand Manan, and is 48 years old. You know where the light-house is ?—A. Yes, and been to it. Q. I will read you some extracts from Mr. McLaughlin's testimony. After showing that he had taken up a good deal of time in preparing statistics, he says as follows with regard to American boats: Q. Well, those boats—those American boats—do they equal or outnumber ours ?—A. I think they outnumber ours. I would not say positively. I am convinced in my own mind that they outnumber ours. Q. Those boats supply the coast of Maine with fish 7–A. Yes. } Q. Our people do not compete with them in those markets 7–A. Our fish go to Boston, Portland, or New York. Those boats supply their own coast. - Q. How often do they go home with their fish 7–A. They fish a week or so and then go home. They have a nice little cabin in the boat and the men sleep in that. As soon as they get a load they go home. Q. How do they keep their fish 7–A. They salt them. - Q. How is it about the fresh fish?–A. Well, when they come for fresh fish in the winter time, of course they have larger boats or vessels. Q. And the fish that are taken by the Americans in the summer they salt 3–A. Certainly, unless they sell them fresh in the American market. It that case the vessels come supplied with ice. There are a few that run to Machias and other places with fresh fish, the same as they do to Eastport or Lubec ; but any that make a business of selling the fish fresh must have an ice-house. x - Q. Those American boats that you spoke of all fish within three miles 3–A. Yes; I con- sider that they all fish within three miles—a marine league. Boat-fishing means that. Q. Now, about how many American vessels fish on the coast during the season 3–A. It would be hard to tell that. It has never been my duty to count them. Q. They come in large numbers and they generally outnumber ours ?—A, Yes; our peo- ple at Grand Manam fish but little in vessels. Q. Do these vessels come in fishing within three miles?—A. At a certain time of the year. In winter it is entirely within. The fall and winter fishing is entirely within. Q. What besides herring are caught in summer ?—A. Cod, pollack, and hake. . Q. They catch in boats and vessels both ?—A. Yes. Q. Now, in the spring, are you not visited by the Grand Manan fleet from Gloucester ?— A. Yes; they used formerly to come to Grand Manan direct. Generally now they go to Eastport and get the Eastport people to catch bait for them. Q. When you say “formerly,” do you mean after the Treaty of Washington?—A. Yes. They did not come before that much. It is since 1871 that have come principally. They will come down every spring. 36. 3& 3; º * % Q. And now they come chiefly to Eastport to employ Eastport fishermen, who catch the fish and bring them to them —A. The big vessels are not fitted out for herring-fishing. They take an Eastport vessel in company with them, and come over and anchor in our AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2355 waters. They bring their own fishermen with them, and anchoy in our waters, and get their bait there. They sometimes come in the fall for bait. ºf % º 36 3. * 36. Q. Where have they gone this year 2—A. I think to Campobello, Deer Island, and those places. Q. Still in British waters ?—A. Yes; we have the herring fishery. Q. How many came down in the spring 3–A. To the Grand Manan grounds, I should say forty sail. I would not say positively. Q. As a practical fisherman, you say about forty sail of them 3–A. Yes. Q. Do you see them come in the fall?—A. Yes; at all times of the year. Q. Then you believe the amount you have given is an underestimate 7–A. I know it must be over half a million dollars; that is, our old $500,000. * Q. That is within the mark for your own island 7—A. Yes. - Q. Of the British catch?—A. Yes; our own Grand Manan people, because sometimes they come over from Campobello and other places, but I have nothing to do with that. Q. Well, now, is the American catch larger or smaller?—A. I think it is larger. Q. Have you any doubt 7–A. No ; because their appliances are so much better than ours, and I think their men outnumber ours. Q. I suppose they are just as assiduous in using their appliances 3–A. Just as much so. One of their vessels will take more haddock in a short time than ours will in a whole year. One of theirs took 150,000 pounds in a week, while all of ours took only 50,000 pounds in the whole year. That was sold fresh. * Do you know anything about that, whether it is true or not true — A. Some of it is exactly true, and some of it I don’t know about. About the Eastport boats outnumbering the Grand Manan boats, I don’t know Whether that is true or not. Q. Mr. McLaughlin further said: Q. On the mainland you say our catch must be half a million, and the American catch is equal to that ?–A. Yes; I think so, because they come down in the winter and follow these fine harbors up. - Q. You make for the mainland and islands a million and a half to be the catch of the Americans, and the same for our own people 7–A. I think that would be fair. Q. That is within our waters, within three marine miles 1—A. Yes. Are you able to say anything about that, whether it is correct or not ?–A. I have been at Grand Manan all my days. I know but just one place round there where you can get bottom within three miles, I Was going to say. That is right between Swallow's Tail and Long Island, Where it is not more than three miles from land to land. There is good hooking there, and that is where all the Grand Manan fishermen go for hake, Cod, and pollack. I cannot say about the Eastport people, for they are so much connected with the Grand Manan people. The East- port vessels go there to fish, and the Grand Manan people come and fish in Passamaquoddy Bay. I never heard of any trouble. They told me at Eastport there was no trouble about the fishing in the river. In regard to herring catches, it was Campobello men who chartered Eastport ves- Sels, and they always tried to charter me. They get the vessels to go in and live in, and give the skipper a certain share and the vessel a certain share, and carry their own nets, and catch the fish. I never knew an American carry a net there in my life. I have been there when the men have caught herrings from St. John's to Campobello, along the whole Shore. I have been there six years running buying herring, and I never saw an American vessel fishing there in my life, except those Chartered in that way. They got a Lubec pinkey there once. Four men at Campobello chartered her. They had no skipper on her then, and they gave a certain share for the use of the vessel. I don't know what the catch was. - Q. I will also read some extracts from the testimony of Mr. James McLean, merchant, Letite Passage, N. B. Do you know Letite Pas- Sage 3—A. Yes. A 23.56 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Do you know Mr. James McLean, merchant, there?—A. I don’t know the name. I cannot recollect the name of one man there, though I know a good many by Sight. Q. Mr. McLean said: Q. You live close to the shore of the bay ?–A. Close to the shore. Q. There are a number of harbois at that part of the coast; in which harbor do you carry on business 7–A. We have a store at Letite and another at Black Bay. Do you recognize him. They are both places in the Bay of Fundy ?–A. They are 50 miles apart. Q. He keeps a store at each place. Are you acquainted with him 2– A. I am not acquainted with him. - Q. Mr. McLean said: Q. You are acquainted with the fishery from Lepreau to Letite?—A. Yes; very well. Q. That is along the mainland 2–A. Yes. Q. Among the islands lying along the coast are Campobello, Deer Island, and some minor islands 2—A. Yes. Q. Besides Grand Manam 2–A. Yes. Q. On the mainland, take from Lepreau to Letite, how many vessels and boats are em- ployed by British subjects?—A. From Lepreau to Letite I should think there are between .50 and 60 vessels. º "That is what he says with regard to British fishing-vessels. Mr. Mc- HDean further says: Q. Before the treaty of Washington, in 1871, how did you deal with the fish 7 Did the . Americans come in as much after the abrogation of the Reciprocity Treaty and before they commenced under the Washington Treaty 3–A. Not catching herrings. Q. Did they do so after 1871 7—A. Yes. Q. Tell the Commission how you dealt with the herring before 1871 ?—A. We dealt with them as we do now. The Americans came down and bought them ; if not, we loaded a vessel ourselves and shipped them frozen to New York. Q. Since the Washington Treaty, the Americans have come down and fished a great ideal 7–A. Yes. - Q. Are the fishing-grounds in your locality entirely in British waters ?—A. Our herring fishery is altogether in British waters—all that I know of ; I don't know of any in Ameri- can waters. - Q. Is that correct 3–A. Yes. Q. Mr. McLean said also: Q. How many fish in the winter time !—A. In the herring-fishing on our coast in winter there are from 100 to 125 American vessels fishing, small and large. Is that true?—A. I should think it was, if they call it fishing when Gloucester Vessels Come down. Q. Are there that number of American vessels fishing in those wa- ters ?–A. I want you to tell me what you call “fishing,” whether by money, hook and line, or nets. That many vessels go there to buy her- ring. If you refer to 125 sail of American vessels, I will grant that number of American vessels go there. .* Q. How do you know that ?—A. I never counted them, but seeing so large a number, and knowing so many, and that gentleman stating the number to be 125, I don’t doubt it. Q. He does not refer to Gloucester vessels. Is it true or not ?—A. I cannot swear to it. He says it is so, and I think it is. Q. He does not refer to Gloucester vessels 3–A. He does not refer to any places. r Q. He says: Q. That is from Lepreau to Latite 2–A. Yes, off Beaver Harbor, Black's Harbor, Black Bay, and Lepreau. Q. What size are the vessels º–A. They range from 10 up to probably 40 or 50 tons. Is that correct 7–A. No. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2357 Q. Are you able to contradict it 3–A. Yes; as regards the vessels I have seen. - Q. Have you any means of knowing 2—A. No; except what I saw during the six years I was there. - Q. You have been to those places 3–A. Yes. Q. How often ?—A. Six winters running. Q. Within the last four years, how often ?—A. I have not been there the last four years. Q. Have you been there the last ten years 7–A. Yes. Q. Have you been there the last six years ?—A. Yes, I think so. Q. Not since %—A. I don’t think so. Q. Are you able to speak with regard to the fisheries there during the last six years 7–A. No ; but I never heard there had been any great change. } Q. Have you endeavored to get any statistics in regard to the fishing on your own coast or any of those coasts 2—A. No ; I never knew they Were wanted. - Q. You never made any inquiries 2—A. No. Q. Then you don’t undertake to contradict any of this evidence %—A. I say there never were 125 sail of American vessels of that description buying herring there during the six years I was there or one-fourth of that number. Q. I am asking in regard to recently 2—A. I cannot say, what were there last winter. - Q. Mr. McLean said further : Q. All the rest of the fleet of 150 vessels fish for herring 7–A. Yes, of the 100 or 125 vessels. Q. Will you state to the Commission the process of fishing, what the Americans do when they come down there 3—A. They come down in their vessels. They frequent our harbors in blustering weather, and in fine weather they go out in the morning and set their nets. Is that correct 2—A. They never used to do so when I was there. Q. You are not able to say anything about the fishing there since always the Washington Treaty 2–A. That is new fishing to me. They used to stay in the harbors while I was there, and set their nets. Q. They have anchors to their nets and large warps, and set a gang of nets, two or four nets to a boat. The nets are allowed to remain out all night and are taken up in the morning, if it is not windy. If it is too windy the vessels remain in harbor, and the nets have to remain in the water until there is a chance to get them taken in. The vessels do not take up the nets; the boats are sent after them, and in blustery weather it is not a very nice job. The herring is taken on board the vessels. Sometimes if there is a large catch the men take the herring to the beach and freeze them ; if there is only a small catch they freeze them on deck, but they cannot freeze the fish so well on deck as on shore. - Q. These vessels which receive the herring as soon as frozen are different vessels?—A. Yes. They are outside of the 125 I mentioned. ^, Q. These are the American vessels which are in the harbors with buyers on board 7–A. Chiefly American vessels. 35 3% # 36. 35 * * Q. It is much more convenient to land 2–A. Yes; with large quantities it is much more convenient to land. Q. Is it not a very great convenience and privilege to the Americans to be allowed to do So 7–A. I should think so ; I look upon it as such. • Q. The Americans themselves consider it a privilege to land 2–A. I suppose so. Q. Obviously it is a very great privilege 7–A. It looks that way. I know that all our fishermen have to land to freeze the fish, and the Americans follow the same methods. There is no difference between them at all: at least I do not see any difference. They fish in the harbor just in common with our own men. Has that changed any since you were there ?—A. Yes; I never saw an American heave a net while I was there and never heard of one. F never saw a Gloucester vessel have a net. 2358 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. You are acquainted with the Bay of Passam aguo ldy ?—A. Yes. Q. Mr. McLean says: Q. Was that not at one time a great herring-ground 7—A. It was once a splendid fishing- ground. - 2 Is that correct?—A. Yes. Q. Since the negotiation of the Washington Treaty, and since the Americans have fished there, what has become of it ! Q. Are you able to answer that?—A. The fishing-ground is there yet. Q. I will read you Mr. McLean's answer: A. It has been destroyed within the last two years. It is now no good whatever. You are not able to say anything about that?—A. I did not know there had been any eruption there that had made any alteration in the bay. Q. Q. This has been done by American fisherman 7–A. Not altogether. The American fish- ermen helped to do it; a great many Americans were concerned in it, but our fishermen were in it too. Q. Were your fishermen driven to it, in order to compete with the Americans?—A. They have to do it; they must do it. Were you aware of the nature of the fishing that went on there 3—A. Yes. & • Q. Was there any trawling there in your day ?—A. No. That is a herring-ground. Q. Mr. McLean says: Q. Another mode of fishing—trawling—is practiced with larger fish, such as pollack, had- dock, &c. Explain the effect of it?—A. Trawling has been pursued, as I understand it, dur- ing the last six or seven years. A. There was no trawling in Passamaquoddy Bay while I was there; So the people told me. I talked with them about fishing. Q. When you gave direct evidence I understood you to be giving evi- dence down to the present time with regard to the value of the British fisheries; you were not doing so 7 You cannot speak of the fisheries Within the last six years?—A. No. - Q. You did not intend to speak of the last six years?—A. No. Q. Along the coast of Maine, say from Eastport westward, there lives a large population who fish entirely in our waters ?—A. Yes. They come from Lubec, Perry, Pembroke, and Eastport, and along by Cutler, and westward of Lubec, and still farther away than that. Q. And from Machias 7—A. I think so. Q. They all come and fish in our waters?—A. Yes. That is since the Washington Treaty?—A. I think a good deal of that is correct. Those boats come over and try in British waters, over at Grand Manan. - Q. Q. Within three miles of their coast there is no fishing of which you are aware?—A. Yes. Q. And this is a population that lives by fishing alone 7–A. From Eastport and along there they follow fishing for a livelihood, beyond question. Is that correct 7–A. Yes. * Q. Q. So that a large body of American fishermen gain their whole livelihood in our waters? —A. Yes; those that fish, there do. Q. What would you say is the quantity of herring alone that comes to Eastport in the course of the season—how many millions go to that small town during this period? Are you able to answer that ?—A. I could not. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2359 Q. The witness answered it in this way: A. I should think, at the least calculation, from seven to ten millions. A. He means herrings by the count I suppose. Q. Are there from seven to ten millions 2—A. I cannot say. Q. Q. And of all the herring caught by you, more than three-quarters goes to Americans, either for food or bait 7–A. Of frozen herring 2 Yes, Q. And of the $50,000 or $60,000 worth that you take, what proportion goes to the Ameri- cans ?—A. About one-third. - Q. Where do you sell the rest?—A. In the Dominibn and New Brunswick ; some are shipped to the West Indies. I suppose you were not acquainted with those matters at all. Have you any knowledge of them 3–A. Yes; I have. I think that statement is correct. Q. Are you acquainted with Mr. James Lord, of Deer Island 7–A. I. am not acquainted in Deer Island. There are two Deer Islands. I be. long to what is called Deer Isle. Q. How many vessels have Campobello fishermen now %–A. I cannot tell. A good many of their skippers go out of Gloucester. I don’t know how many vessels are owned at Campobello ; I could not give you an idea. Q. Mr. James Lord is fishing overseer at Deer Island 3–A. Yes. Q. He said: Q. Now, is it part of your official duty to ascertain the number of boats and vessels en- gaged in the fishery there ?—A. It is. Q. Can you tell me what is the number of schooners or vessels 2—A. There are 28 vessels engaged in the fishery in my district. - Q. Of what tonnage 7–A. The aggregate tonnage is about 700 tons. Q. How many men are employed there?—A. I have a memorandum. (Reads.) There were 171 men engaged in the vessels fishing. Q. How many boats are there?—A. 234. * % º 36. º: % - # Q. Do the Americans fish much on the coast 2—A. Yes; they fish in common with our fishermen, on the same fishing grounds. Is that correct 2—A. They do. Eastport fishermen and those people are all One. Q. f |. How many vessels have they?—A. I should think they had full as many as our {}l KS, A. Should think it is likely that Eastport has. Q. *. Q. Campobello employs about how many vessels and how many boats 4–A. I could not give you exactly the number. I should say it was about equal to West Isles. I should not think there would be much difference. Are you aware of that ?—A. Eastport, Lubec, and Campobello are all one, and the people live in sight of one another, and get on agreeably about fishing. I talked with them about it when I was at Eastport Seeing them. - Q. Them off Campobello there is about $180,000 worth taken by our people 3–A. I should Say S.O. Q. And $180,000 worth at West Isles?—A. Yes. Q. And the Americans take an equal catch in both places 3–A. Yes. Is that correct 3–A. I should think so. 2360 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Q. All within three miles!—A. Yes; with the exception of one or two vessels from Deer Is and that go outside. The chief catches are inshore. Is that correct 7––A. Yes. Q. - Q. Well, when I asked you for an estimate of the catch, and you gave me $180,000, you did not include in that amount the fish that was caught outside 7–A. No. You do no include that either, I presume?—A. No. Q. That is about a million ?—A. Yes. Q. Have you any doubt you are underestimating rather than overestimating it?—A. No doubt that is under, if anything. * Q. That is taken by British subjects 2—A. Yes. Q. Then the American fishermen, do they take on these coasts as much every year as the British subjects, or more ?–A. I think they do fully as much. I have no doubt. If I were going to say either more or less, I would say more. A. I don’t think that is correct. - - Q. Do you know anything about it 2–A. Nothing more than that I was there fishing. I have not been there for six years, but I know about it. . Q. What was the quantity when you were there—$900,000?–A. I can give no kind of estimate. Q. Would it be $500,000?–A. I could not give any kind of an estimate. Q. Would you undertake to say it was not $500,000?—A. No; I could not say any amount. Q. Is there any fish on the American shore at all ? Are you aware of any fish within the three-mile limit 2–A. There are none worth talking about. None of our fishermen ever visit that coast for the sake of fish. What do you say ?—A. I say that is not true. Before I left home there was a Grand Manan vessel in at Deer Island, the skipper of which wanted me to pilot him down to Isle of Haut not to catch mackerel. I would have done it if I had not had a boat of my own. Q. You are able to qualify the statement by that instance; are you able to give any other instance 2—A. I have known of British vessels being in our waters. & Q. Tell me what vessels they were.—A. I don’t know. Grand Manan vessels have no names painted on their sterns. Q. Then never mind their names. How many were there; dil you Count them 7–A. There have been three which I have been acquainted With. Q. How long ago was that ?—A. Thirty years ago the first one ; and she belonged to Brier Island; the last ones were on Sunday last or Sunday previous. $, Q. Those are the only ones you can mention at present 3–A. Yes. By Mr. Foster: Q. Was it this summer you saw the two vessels 3—A. Sunday before last. Q. The quantity of ten millions of herrings was spoken of Can you give the Commission an idea of what herring are worth each 7–A. They Vary in size. Q. If you take the value of 1,000 or 100 herring ?–A. If they aver- aged one cent they would do very well, I think. Q. Do they average one cent 3 How many are there in a barrel, and what is the price of a barrel ?—A. I cannot say. I had very hard luck. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2361. I lost $600 the first cruise, and on the other three or four cruises I hardly got out square. I was very unlucky. If you don’t hit the mar- ket at Gloucester you get shoved overboard. , Q. That is when they want bait 3–A. Yes. • Q. Did you intend to assent to the statement that all the herring- fishing you know of is in British waters ?—A. Not by any means. In winter it is the only place where they catch them. I don’t know but that there is as good fishing on our shore, but we never catch them in winter, and never tried ; but we do in spring and summer, and now they are doing as well in Portland herring-fishing as was ever done anywhere. Q. There is herring-fishing all along the United States coast 2—A. I rather think there is. Q. You say you did not mean to say in cross-examination that all the herring-fishing is in British waters. Will you enumerate the places on the United States coast where herring are caught in considerable quan- tities, and the season of the year when they are caught 2—A. I don’t know of any place on the whole coast but which, at certain times of the year, has large quantities of herring. At Isle of Haut, for instance, we were getting from 5 to 15 barrels a night in one net when I left there. They were small-sized herring; the nets were one-inch mesh. They Sunk the nets and lost some of them. The people had no means of Smoking the herring, so they salted them for lobster bait. There are 100 Sail vessels which make it a practice to go in the fall to catch her- ring. They make Portland their headquarters. They strike for Wood Island, and go eastward to Cape Porpoise, and clear along into Boston Bay, and down by the Graves, and they catch more herring than is Caught anywhere I know of in British North America. Q. Did you mean to assent to the statement that American vessels fish for herring in British waters as a fact you know of ?—A. Not with nets. They buy herring there. I never knew an American to have a net there, and I never heard of one. Q. Did you mean to assent to the statement that there were several fishing towns in Maine which gained their whole livelihood by fishing in British waters?—A. I do not know of any such business. Q. Will you state whether you understand that there are any fishing towns in Maine the inhabitants of which get their living by fishing in British waters ?—A. I don’t know of one. Q. Did you mean to say, in answer to Mr. Weatherbe's question, that there were any towns on the coast of Maine the inhabitants of which get their living by fishing in British waters ?—A. No; but I do think the people of Eastport and Grand Manan are like one, and fish back and forth. Q. That is what you stated yesterday?—A. Yes. Q. You say that the frozen herring business, as far as you know, is Carried on in British waters entirely?—A. Yes. Q. In answer to questions put to you yesterday with regard to the failure of the fisheries of Maine, did you refer to the failure of the fish- ing business or to the failure of the catch of fish 7–A. I meant the fish- ing business. º A Q. How is it as to the catch of fish off the coast of Maine?—A. I Cannot Say that the catch has materially altered there, although fish are not So plentiful as they used to be. But I don’t think that the change in the catch makes so much difference as the price and expense of get- ting them, for Maine is about bankrupt from end to end in the fishing business. - Q. When the fishing-vessels of your own town and its vicinity, and 2362 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. the other places you spoke of yesterday, were engaged in fishing, where did they catch their fish 2 Was it off the shores of the United States or off the coast of the British provinces, or both 2–A. From the Grand Banks to Cape Cod, in every place where they now carry it on. They - had equally as good vessels as anybody, and went all over the shores. Q. After what kind of fish?—A. All kinds. They did not go so much for halibut our way as for codfish and mackerel. But it is estimated by the best judges of the fisheries that our State has depreciated 60 per cent., and in a good many places I know it has 100 per cent. Q. What has depreciated ?–A. The fishing business. By Mr. Weatherbe : Q. The reason they do not try to fish on the coast of Maine is because the fishing is better up in the Bay of Fundy?—A. They cannot live by fishing, go where they will. Q. I thought you told Mr. Foster that you did not know but that the fish were there, but you did not try to fish them there ?—A. I did not say we tried to fish for them. I say I did not know but what the fish- ing is very nearly the same as usual. - - Q. Your fishermen do not now try to catch fish on the coast of Maine 3— A. They try somewhere ; it is their business. - Q. I understood you to say they do not try to catch fish on the coast of Maine 3–A. I did not say So. Q. T)o they try 7–A. Yes; we have plenty of vessels and boats all the time trying to fish on the coast of Maine. Q. But the whole business, you say, is bankrupt 2—A. Pretty much so; pretty much abandoned. There used to be 125 sail of vessels which fitted out from Castine; I don’t know of one this year. No. 34. SAMUEL T, ROWE, of Gloucester, Mass., fisherman, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster: Question. Your business has been that of a fisherman and skipper of fishing vessels all your life?—Answer. Yes. * Q. How old are you?—A. 55 years. Q. What was the first year you were in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence fishing for mackerel?—A.. I was there in 1845. Q. You had been in the gulf a good many times before you were cap- tain, had you not ?—A. No; only one year; one trip. . When were you first captain 3–A. In 1846. What was the vessel ?—A. Champion. . When were you in the gulf next 3–A. In 1851. In what schooner?—A. O’Connell. ... Were you in the gulf afterward 2–A. Yes. In what years?—A. 1851, 1852, 1853, and 1855. You were not there in 1854%—A. No. . As skipper every time 2—A. Yes. ... Were you there in any other vessels?—A. I was there in the Oco- HOWOC. Q. What years were you in the gulf in that vessel ?—A. 1856, 1857, and 1858; three years. - - Q. Then what schooner did go in 7—A. I was in the Alferetta in 1859. Q. How many years did you remain in that vessel?—A. From 1859. until last year. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2363 Q. Were you in the gulf all those years 7–A. No. Q. Do you remember how many years you were in command of that vessel in the gulf?—A. I was in the gulf all but two years, I think, 1870 and 1871. I have not been in the gulf since 1874.—I was skipper of the vessel. - Q. I will take your experience of fishing in the gulf in the Alferetta, beginning in 1859. How large a schooner was she 7–A. 55 tons. Q. New measurement 7–A. Yes. Q. In 1859 what was your catch 3—A. 220 barrels. Q. In 1860 what was it?—A. We got about the same. Q. In 1861?—A. We got 310 barrels, I think. Q. 1862?–A. We got 420 or 425 barrels; I could not say to four or five barrels. -- Q. 1863?—A. We made two trips, and got 330 barrels each trip. Q. Take that year when you had 330 barrels each of two trips, and tell the Commission where they were caught.—A. They were mostly caught at the Magdalen Islands. The first trip was all caught at the Magdalen Islands. Q. And the second trip 7–A. The largest part was caught at the Magdalen Islands and between that and Margaree, about half way across, I think. Q. Were any of the second trip in 1863 caught inshore?—A. No. Q. In 1864 what was your catch 3–A. l think 320 barrels each trip. We made two trips. Q. For what quantity was your vessel fitted ?–A. 330 or 340 barrels. Q. Those years you got nearly full fares each time 2—A. Nearly. Q. Where were those two trips in 1864 taken 7–A. Mostly at the Magdalen Islands; about 50 or 60 barrels were taken at Margaree broad off on the fall trip. Q. Those taken at Margaree, were they taken inshore or off shore ?— A. I should judge five or six miles out, out of the range of the island, between that and Cape Mabou. * Q. In 1865 what did you catch 7–A. We made two trips, and caught 240 and 225 barrels. i * Q. Where were those taken 7–A. Mostly at Magdalen Islands; some few might have been caught somewhere else. We caught some few some years on the fall trip between Cape George and Port Hood, round the Fisherman's Bank, and between the island and Cape George. Q. In 1866 what did you catch 2—A. 300 barrels the first trip and 115 the Second. - Q. Where did you take the first trip 7–A. At Magdalen Islands. Q. All of them 2–A. Yes. Q. Where did you take the second trip 7–A. We got part of them at Magdalen Islands. We caught the trip round in different places; but most of them we got at Magdalen Islands, 70 or 80 barrels. Q. Were you licensed in 1866 %–A. Yes. Q. In 1867 you were in the gulf again 3–A. Yes. Q. Were you then licensed ?–A. Yes; I think so. Q. How many barrels did you get in 1867 ?—A. 300 barrels. Q. Where were they taken 3–A. At Magdalen Islands. Q. Did you fish anywhere else?—A. No ; I don’t think we did on that trip. Q. In 1868 were you in the gulf again?—A. Yes. Q. Were you licensed that year 2—A.. I don’t think we were. Q. How many barrels did you get 2—A. Somewhere about 280 bar- rels, I think. 2364 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Where were those taken 3–A. Most of them at Magdalen Islands. That is mostly our fishing-ground, except late in the fall, when we get a few round at other places. - Q. In 1869 were you in the gulf?—A. Yes. Q. How many did you get then 7–A. About 260 barrels, I think. Q. Where were they taken 3–A. We got most of them at Magdalen Islands. Some, I think, we caught between Cape George and Margaree. We got some in some years off Cape Breton, between Cape George and Port Hood, and off Fisherman's Bank. Late in the fall we would go round there, and sometimes pick up a few barrels, thirty or forty, and some vessels less. ! Q. In those years were you in the habit of fishing in the Bend of |Prince Edward Island 3–A. I have been there, but I have fished there very little. . - Q. Did you then fish within three miles of the shore ?—A. No. The very few times I was there to try, I generally tried from seven to ten miles out. I have not been there for a number of years. . Q. In 1870 were you on the American coast or in the gulf?—A. On the United States coast. - Q. Fishing for mackerel ?—A. I think we were cod-fishing in 1870. Q. You were not in the gulf in 1870 and 1871 ?—A. No. Q. Were you in the gulf in 1872?–A. Yes. Q. How many barrels did you get 2—A. 315, or about that number. Q. Where were those taken º–A. We got most of them at Magdalen Islands. We caught a few at Margaree, between that and Chetacamp. Q. Inshore or out 2—A.. I think we were out four miles. # Q. In 1873 what did you get in the gulf 3–A. I think 290 barrels. Q. How long were you in getting them 3–A. We went into the gulf . in July and came out somewhere about October 20. Q. In 1874 were you there again 3–A. Yes. Q. What did you get then 7–A. I think we had about 315 barrels that year. - l Q. Will you describe that voyage %–A. In 1874 we were there all the season. We went into Canso and landed fifty barrels of mackerel. We afterwards took them on board and carried them home. Q. How many barrels did you get that year 2—A. 315 barrels. Q. Were those packed barrels?—A. No ; sea barrels. - Q. The collector at Port Mulgrave says you made two trips, and got 230 barrels the first trip and 170 the second. That is not so º–A. No ; it is not so. Q. Did you ever give anybody the statement that it was so 3–A. No ; I never did. I only made one trip in 1874. Q. Where were your fish taken that year?—A. At the Magdalen Isl- ands. Q. All of them 3–A. Yes. | - Q. If I have added up this statement correctly, you have caught in the Gulf of St. Lawrence nearly 5,000 barrels—4,930. You have been up here during 14 seasons, and you got 19 trips; the average of your trips is 259.1%; barrels, and the average of your seasons, 3524 barrels. Now, I want you to take your last trip in the gulf in 1874, when you obtained 315 sea barrels, as you say, and let me see how profitable that was to you. In the first place, with whom did you fit out 2—A. With Rowe & Jordan. Q. Mr. Rowe, of that firm, is your brother ?—A. Yes. * Q. As captain that year in the Alferetta, you had in the first place your own catch as sharesman, I suppose ?—A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2365 Q. Who caught the most mackerel on board that year 7—A.. I did. Q. You were high-liner, as it is called ?–A. Yes. Q. Has the captain choice of positions?—A. Yes. . He has one of the best berths; there are two about alike, and the captain has one of them. He has his choice anyway. I Q. What did your share come to?—A. Somewhere about $125 or $130, think. - Q. Did that include your percentage as captain 7–A. No. Q. What percentage did you have as captain 3–A. 34 per cent. Q. What was your net stock that year?—A. It was in the neighbor- hood of $2,300, I suppose. Q. And on that you had a percentage of 33 per cent.”—A. Yes. Q. Did you make anything else out of the voyage than What you have mentioned ?–A. No. I owned one-half of the véssel. Q. Did the vessel make or lose money that year 2—A. She lost $150 for the whole fishing season. We began fishing in April and we knocked off in the latter part of October. 3. Q. Then you did something else besides fishing for mackerel ?—A. Yes. We went cod-fishing in the spring. - - Q. How did you do at cod-fishing that year 2–A. We did very well. Q. Did you make or lose on the cod-fishing trip 2–A. I do not think that we lost much. In fact, I do not think that we lost anything. Q. Was the cod-fishing less or more profitable than the mackerel-fish- ing 2—A. I could not tell exactly. I suppose the vessel was about Square when we came to the bay. Q. You were about square on the year's cod-fishing 2—A. Yes. Q. And how was it at the end of the year?—A. One hundred and fifty dollars were sunk. - - Q. What was your share of the loss 2—A. One-half. N Q. Was that making any allowance for interest or depreciation 3—A. O. - - Q. Was the vessel insured?—A. Yes; but she could not pay her bills within $150. Q. You seem to have made quite as good catches of mackerel as the average for any one who has been here so many years?—A. We used to do about as well as the average, I guess. Q. Have you got rich on it 3–A. O, no; I have not got much of any- thing. I own a house, and that is about all. The vessel has been run about out. Q. What do you mean by that ?—A. She has run until she has sunk What she is worth. Q. Is the vessel lost 2—A. Some years she sunk considerable, and Other years she made something. - Q. You are 55 years of age, and you have been fishing ever since you Were a boy 7–A. I began when I was ten years old, and have been at it steadily since I was 15. Q. How much are you worth?—A. I have a house worth about $3,000, I Suppose, and that is about all I have. I have no vessel now ; that is how well I have done; and there are a good many as badly off as I am. Q. If you were going to the Gulf of St. Lawrence to fish, should you regard the privilege of fishing within three miles of the shore as im- portant to the success of your voyage %–A. No, I should not ; , because I have never fished there much. They drive you off there a great deal. Q. You seem to have had licenses during two years; why did you take them out 2––A. Well, they did not cost much, and I thought they 2366 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. might trouble me and drive me around. They drove us out of a harbor OIl C6. - - Q. What do you mean by this ?––A. They stopped us from going into the harbor. This was a good while ago, and I thought I would take out a license. It did not amount to much, and if I found anything inshore, I then had a right to catch fish there. - Q. The first year you paid 50 cents a ton on 55 tons for your license; What did you pay the second year 7—A. I forget; but I think it was $1 a ton. I won’t, however, be certain about it. Q. Have you ever fished for mackerel on Georges Bank 3–A. O, yes. Q. You have gone there on purpose to fish for mackerel ?––A. O, yes; and for a number of years. Q. Without going into the details of the voyages, will you state Whether it is a good fishing ground 3–A. It is a good fishing ground. I have got a good many mackerel there. Q. You have been cod-fishing a good deal, I notice 3––A. Yes. Q. How have you supplied yourself with bait 2–A. We always got our bait home. During the first part of the season we would go to Cape Cod and the sound for it. Generally, after the first one or two trips, when the frozen herring were gone, we went over across to Cape Cod, to what is called the Shoals, and procured bait until it came our way, and we then baited during the rest of the year at home. Q. Have you ever got bait where you were fishing on the Banks 3– A. Yes. Q. What kind of bait 2–A. Herring. Q. Have you ever been to Newfoundland for bait º–A. Yes; but not for fresh bait. I went there after frozen herring. Q. Did you buy or catch the herring 2—A. I bought them. Q. For bait for your own vessel ?—A. No ; but a cargo. I took them home. Q. How often did you purchase them 3–A. I did so for a few years. Q. Where did you go for them 7–A. To Fortune Bay. Q. Did you go there prepared to fish for them 3–A. No ; and I never saw any one who did so, when I went there. It is now a number of years Since I was there. t Q. In how many Prince Edward Island harbors have you been ?–A. I have been in Georgetown, and Malpeque, and in Cascumpeque once, in 1851. I went there for barrels. The man who fitted us out then had barrels there and he wanted us to go and take them. Q. Why did you go to Malpeque 3–A. To make a harbor. I was never there a great deal. + Q. How many times have you been fishing there ?—A. I was about there mostly all one year, I think, and I might have been in there four or five times. y - * Q. How many times were you in Georgetown 3–A. I do not think I was there over two or three times. I was in Georgetown Harbor for the first time, I think, in 1874, save once. I was there in 1856 or 1857, and I do not think that I was there again until 1874. Q. Are those harbors of such a kind that fishing-vessels in bad weather can easily enter them 3–A. No ; those which are on the north side of the island are not so. Q. Why not ?—A. Well, it is kind of shoal water about them, and it is generally pretty rough there when the wind is blowing on shore. When the wind is to the westward and off shore, they do well enough, but when the wind is blowing on shore, they are considerably rough. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2367 Q. When the wind is off shore, there is no particular danger to be ex- perienced when entering them 7–A. No. Q. Have you been in the habit of going to Port Hood 2–A. Yes; I have been there a number of times. - Q. At what season of the year 7—A. Late in the fall, to make a har- bor; when we are going to the Magdalen Islands, we are sometimes there for ten days or a week; and in the fall, when we are down around that Way, we generally spend the night in there. Q. When, in the autumn, do you generally get into the vicinity of Port Hood 2–A. We never get over there until along about the 10th or the middle of October. Some are there earlier. Q. Where, on the whole, has been your fishing ground 7–A. It has been at the Magdalen Islands. We went to Bank Orphan on our first trip Some years. Q. Have you usually fished in company with the greater part of the Gloucester vessels?—A. Well, yes. A good many vessels fished around the Magdalen Islands. Some days you will only see a few there when a large fleet is there, and some days you will see a good many there. Q. Why?—A. Because they are all around the islands. The mack- erel are found all about them, and the vessels fish all-around them. Q. Have you ever fished in the Bay of Chaleurs?—A. No ; I was never there but once, and that was in 1874. . Did you go in to try for mackerel ?—A. Yes. . What was your luck?—A. We never caught a mackerel. . Did you ever fish off Seven Islands 2—A. Yes; once. When 3–A. In 1852, I think. That was a good many years ago 7–A. Yes. . Did you catch any fish there 7–A. No ; we got nothing there, and We did not stop long. - By Mr. Davies: Q. What kind of a harbor is Port Hood 2–A. Well, it is a middling good harbor, though it is nothing extra. Q. It is a pretty fair harbor ?—A. Yes. A&When you were there in the fall, were many of the fleet there ?— . Y. 62S. - - Q. How many ?—A. I do not know, as I could not exactly say ; some- times 150 vessels and sometimes 60 would be there; but I do not think that I ever saw over 200 vessels there at one time. Q. There were always from 60 to 200 in that harbor when you were in it 3–A. Not always; but this would be the case a good many times late in the fall. I was never there save late in the fall. Q. When you were then there you would always find in it a fleet more or less large %–A. Yes. Q. And you think the numbers varied from 60 to 150 and 2002—A. Two hundred were the most I think I ever saw there at once; and a good many of them were English vessels, from Lunenburg and La Have. Q. These vessels were all engaged in fishing, I suppose ?–A. Yes. Q. And I believe you were there every fall ?—A. I was there almost every fall. Q. It is one of the fishing-grounds well known to fishermen in the fall ?—A. Yes; for those who fish that way; some fish the other way, down to the Magdalen Islands and half-way across between them and Cheticamp; and if the wind is to the eastward, they make Port Hood their harbor, as there is no other harbor in which one can run about there. i 2368 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. The shores of Cape Breton Island, from Port Hood to Cheticamp and Margaree, &c., are well known to all fishermen as good fishing- grounds in the fall 7–A. Yes; spells of mackerel are found there. Q. And as a rule, the fleet go there some little time at any rate %–A. Yes; some of the vessels go that way. Q. You were accustomed to go there every fall, for a greater or less time 7–A. We never fished at Margaree a great deal. Q. But you were at Port Hood or Cheticamp 7–A. Almost every fall. We would be there a week, I suppose. Q. And off Sydney 2—A. No ; I was never around Cape North. Q. But you were around the Cape Breton shore every fall ?–A. Yes; our vessels were there late in the fall. Q. And sometimes you were there for a week, and sometimes for 10 days º–A. Yes. - Q. Were good catches made there at these times 2—A. I never saw but one good catch made there and that was taken between Margaree and Cape Mabou. - - Q. Is that on Cape Breton 2–A. Yes. - Q. Between Margaree Island and the mainland a good catch was made 3–A. Yes. Q. Were many vessels then there 2–A. No ; there were 25 or 30 sail. Q. What do you call a good catch as taken there ?—A. 60 or 70 barrels. Q. A piece º–A. Yes; but all vessels do not catch alike. Q. Your judgment would be that each of these 25 or 30 vessels caught 60 or 70 barrels 2—A. I do not think that all did so. I understood you to ask what I thought a good catch was. Some of them did not get more than 30 barrels. Q. Do you know what the vessels took at the time 2—A. O, yes. . Q. What did they take 3–A. One vessel caught 70 barrels, and we got 50. - Q. Would that be the general average %–A.. I could not tell. We saw them all catching fish around us, but vessels do not always fish alike. There is a good deal of difference between them. One might catch 100 barrels, and another not one-half that. I have seen this happen offen. Q. You understood that they made good catches 7–A. I know that another vessel, my brother's, took 70 barrels. Q. Have you any doubt as to this being the average for the fleet 7– A. I do not think that it was ; but I think they all got a large share. Q. Within what time did you take them 3–A. We got them all dur- ing one day. Q. What have you caught there every fall ?—A. I have obtained very few there, that fall excepted. Q. You went there nevertheless 2—A. Yes; but we got most of our stock at the Magdalen Islands. Q: Did the fleet also go there ?—A. They went somewhere, but I do not know where. Q. I understand you to state that you do not know where the fleet went º–A. I could not tell. I know that they left the Magdalen Islands, but I could not say whether they went to Margaree or Prince Edward Island. Q. But they either went to Margaree or Prince Edward Island 7–A. Of course ; when fishing, vessels go from one place to another, and it is hard to tell where they go. • Q. I heard a witness state—I think it was yesterday—that the mack- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2369 erel strike in on the Cape Breton shore when going down 3–A. They generally do so." Q. And the vessels follow them ?—A. But it is not often that they Stop more than a day or two. Q. Did you take the 50 barrels close inshore ?—A. No ; we were five or six miles outside of the range of Margaree Island, I should think, from the look of it. We were to the southwest of Margaree Island. Q. You were between Margaree Island and Mabou?—A. Yes. Q. When was this 2—A. In 1864. Q. Would you undertake to swear at this length of time what dis- tance you were then from the shore ?–A. Well, I think it was what I have told you. Q. You then had a right to fish inshore?—A. Yes; I think we were about five miles off shore. - Q. Would you swear to this?—A. I could not ; we never measured it. Q. Can you positively state the distance %–A. No ; no farther than I have done to the best of my judgment. Generally, a man can tell two miles from five or six. Q. I have heard witnesses say that they could not tell three miles from five.—A. I do not know about that : but I should think they could. Q. You think that there is no difficulty in telling the distance from shore?—A. O, yes. One could not tell it exactly, but I think a man Ought to tell whether he was three or five miles off. Q. You think there is no difficulty about it 7—A. I should not think SO. Q. Is your memory very accurate 3—A. Well, sometimes it is, and Sometimes I cannot remember some things. Q. What did you say you caught in 1874%—A. 315 barrels. Q. And that only 3–A. Yes; and we made one trip that year. Q. When did you go to the bay ?—A. In July. Q. Is your memory sufficiently clear on that point to state whether it was in June or July 7–A. Yes; it was in July, after the 4th,; it might have been on the 8th of that month. º: Q. You are reported in the return to which Mr. Foster called atten- tion, to have been in the Gut on June 25th ?—A. No; that is a mistake Or a misstatement. Q. Where were you September 1st, 1874?—A. I do not know exactly; but I think that about that time we went to Canso. Q. Can you tell me how many barrels you had on board then 3–A. §: Well, I think that we had somewhere about 270–260 or 270 2,I’I’él S. Q. You cannot remember the number exactly 3–A. No ; not within 10 or 15 barrels. Q. You landed a portion of them ?—A. Yes; 50 barrels. Q. Do you know David Murray, collector of customs at the port there ?—A. No. Q. How often have you been in Canso 3–A. I was there every year I was in the bay. - Q. And you do not know Mr. Murray ?—A.. I suppose I may have Seen him, but I could not tell him now if I saw him. ..I suppose I have been in his office. - Q. Do you know the man 3–A. I know there is such a man. Q. Have you ever spoken to him 3–A. I could not say that I have, but I have spoken either to him or to his clerk. I have been at his office. Q. Do you know him 3–A. I do not say that I do, but I have seen him or his clerk. I have been at his office. 149 F 2370 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What did you go there for ?—A. To get a permit to land mack- erel. Q. Were you accustomed to tell him what your catch was ?–A. Yes, sometimes; when he asked me I used to tell him. * Q. Was he accustomed to ask you about it 3–A. I do not know that he was. - t Q. You gave voluntary information on the subject?—A. No ; I did not tell without being asked. * ^ Q. If he did not ask you and if you did not give him voluntary informa- tion, how is it you say you were accustomed to state what your catch was?—A. I told him it when he asked me about it, but I could not SWear that he asked me about it. - Q. Do you mean at any special time? Don’t quibble about it.—A. No ; I could not swear that Murray ever asked me what my catch was, and I do not swear whether I know the man. Q. Do you or do you not know the collector of Port Mulgrave, JDavid Murray ? Have you ever seen him 7–A. I do not know, but I have been at his office. Q. Have you there seen a man you believed to be him 7–A. I do not know as I took notice. I went there for a permit ; it was given, me and H went off. Q. Did you ever state at his office what your catch was ?—A. I do not remember that I ever did so. Q. Did you state to me a few moments ago that you had done so?— A. I do not know as I did. - Q. Do you recollect stating that you told him or his clerk what your catch was 3—A. I told you I did so if he asked me about it. Q, Did they ask you about it 3–A. I could not say ; they may and they may not. I cannot recollect. Q. Do I understand you to say that your recollection is an absolute blank on that point; you do not remember stating your catch or whether they askeg you about it?–A., No; I do not. Q. Were you there on October 20, 1874%—A. No. Q. You were not there at Port Mulgrave?—A. No. Q. Were you there September 1st, 1874 %—A. Well, I was only there that once. I do not know when it was, but I think it was somewhere in the first part of September. That?is the only time we were there, save when we came from home. We stopped at Pirate's Cove, two or three miles below Port Mulgrave. Q. Is that where Murray's office is ?—A. No. Q. And you do not know whether you saw him or not ?— A. No. Q. But you may have seen him 7–A. I do not know the man. I could not tell him if I saw him. -- Q. In this report to which your attention has been called, it is men- tioned that the Alferetta, a Gloucester vessel, landed fish there the 1st of September, and was there October 20th, 1874, on the second trip with 170 barrels.--A. That is not correct. g Q. What was your total catch that year?—A. 315 barrels or there- abouts. - Q. Mr. Murray reports it 400 barrels 7–A. That is the way reports get carried round, repeated many times; and they thus make one have more fish than he caught. I think this is the case sometimes. Q. Were you more than once in the Gut of Canso that year?—A. We were there three times on our way up, and on our way home, and once to land Some fish. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2371 Q. Did you stop there when you were going home 2—A. Yes; to take the 50 barrels on board. Q. In whose charge were they left 3—A. In Mr. Hartley’s. Q. Did you inform him what your catch was ?—A, I do not recollect; but most likely I did. He most always seemed to ask what it was. Q. And if you did so inform him, of course you told him the truth 3– A. Yes. I would tell him what we had. A Q. You never fished in the Bay of Chaleurs?—A. No ; save once, When we tried and failed. Q. Did you try near the shore there ?—A. We tried all over the bay. Q. Did you try there near the shore within the three-mile limit 3–A. Yes; I think we did. - Q. When was this ?—A. It was a number of years ago. Q. During the Reciprocity Treaty º–A. Yes, I think so. Q. Was a portion of the fleet accustomed to resort to the Bay of Chal- eurs to fish”—A. Only a very few vessels were in it when we were there. Q. Were the fleet accustomed to repair there for the purpose of fish- ing 3—A. I could not tell, I am sure. Q. Did you never hear that this was their custom 3—A.. I have heard that Some vessels went there. Q. That a portion of the fleet did so 3–A. Some vessels—yes. Q. Did you hear that a portion of the fleet was accustomed to fish there 3—A. I do not know that I ever heard of more than 10 or 12 sail of our vessels being there at one time. - Q. And if they were there, you do not know whether this was the case or not ?—A. Of course; I only know what I have heard. Q. Did you never fish around Bonaventure ?—A. Yes, off and on. Q. But anywhere along the shore ?—A. No. Q. Have you fished about Seven Islands 2—A. Yes, once; but I did not catch anything. - Q. You never fished there again 7–A. Yes. * Q. Do you know whether any portion of the fleet was accustomed to fish there at times 2–A. There were not a great many vessels there then ; perhaps there were 8 or 10. Q. But during the year?—A. I do not think so. Q. You know that some vessels go there?—A. Well, some few do. Q. Did you ever fish around the shores of Prince Edward Island 3– A. Yes, but very little. I have tried there off and on, at different times, and over across to East Point, Magdalen Islands, and then come right back to Malpeque. Q. Have you fished around East Point?—A. I have tried there. Q. Close in shore ?—A. I do not think that I was ever within the three-mile limit. + Q. Are you positive about this ?—A. No. Q. You may have fished there within the three-mile limit?—A. Yes; but I could not say. - Q. You were on the Alferetta in 1863?–A. Yes. Q. And you caught about 330 barrels each trip º–A. Yes. Q. Did you catch any portion of the first trip in 1863 within three miles of Prince Edward Island 2–A. We never caught a fish in sight of Prince Edward Island. Q. That year?—A. No ; we came out of Souris and went straight to the Magdalen Islands; and we never left there until we started for home, in the latter part of August, I think. 2372 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Do you know John F. Campion ?—A. Yes; he was with us that trip. Q. Do you know that he has been examined here 3—A. Yes. Q. Have you had his statement read to you ?—A. Yes, I have seen it Q. And you heard what he said about that first trip in the Alfer- etta?—A. Yes. * * Q. He was asked— Q. What was your catch in the Alferetta that year?—A. During the one trip that I was in her we caught 300 barrels. Q. Were they caught outside the three-mile limit or close inshore?—A. Some were caught * East Point, Margaree, and the balance around the island and the Magdalen Isl- 3. E101S. Q. What distance were you from the shore?—A. One-third of that trip was caught be- º: East Point and the Magdalen Islands, and the balance close to the shore of both IS18.101C.S. A. That is not correct ; we never hove to in sight of the island. Q. Your memory differs from his on that point?—A. Well, I cannot help that. We went right straight to the Magdalen Islands, and we left there the latter part of August. f Q. And you are equally sure that you did not catch any fish that year within the three-mile limit, as you are that you did not do so any other year 3–A. I am certain as to that year, because we were full of mackerel when we went home. - Q. Do you mean to speak from your recollection as to that year, re- specting the distance you fished from the shore, as distinct from and bet- ter than for other years?—A. No ; but I can tell when we catch fish at the Magdalen Islands—when we get whole fares there. Q. You are just as sure respecting other years as this year 7—A. I do not know about other years when we get fish at different places; but when I catch a whole trip at a certain place, I recollect that pretty Well. Q. You did not catch that whole trip at the Magdalen Islands 2— A. Yes, we did. Q. Where did you catch the second trip that year?—A. Mostly at the Magdalen Islands, and between them and Margaree. Q. Did you take any portion of it at Margaree ?—A. No ; but the last day We fished after we left Magdalen Islands, we were just in sight of Margaree. Q. You do not appear to have fished, except on one occasion, within three miles of the shore?—A. I never caught any fish inshore to amount, to anything. Q. In 1866 you took out a license?—A. Yes. º Q. You had fished in the bay for 14 years previously, and though you had never caught any fish inshore, you deemed it necessary to take out a license then ?—A. I thought the license was cheap, and I had heard a good deal about vessels being driven round, and so I thought I would take one. Q. But you did not catch any fish that year within the three-mile limit?—A. I do not know that we did, save at the Magdalen Islands. Q. The price of the licenses doubled the next year, and still you took Out another. What explanation have you to make as to your motives for doing so?—A. If we found mackerel anywhere inshore, we could have fished there. | Q. And still during sixteen years you had never taken any fish Within three miles of the shore ?—A. Yes; but I might not have got fish at the Magdalen Islands that year, and then I could have gone Somewhere else. - AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 2373 Q. Had you an impression that the fishery would fail that year at the Magdalen Islands?—A. No ; the license did not cost a great deal. I only paid half of it, and I thought it best to be sure, and be on the safe side. - Q. Then the possible failure of the fishing at the Magdalen Islands had nothing to do with your motives in doing so 2 You must have had Some other motives 3–A. We then had a right to go anywhere we had a mind to. Q. When you had the license 2–A. Of course. Q. But why did you do so, when for 16 years you had never caught any fish there ?—A. We did not know what we would do. Q. Had you heard from others that the fleet were accustomed to take the fish inshore ?–A. Well, no; I do not know as I ever heard of any- body catching a great many fish within the three-mile limit; but I know the fish were caught 5, 6, 7, and 8 miles off shore, and the like of that. Q. Or 4 miles off?—A. Yes; I suppose so; but I cannot say what Others have done. - Q. You have heard of the fish being taken within 4 miles of the coast 3–A. I suppose that some few have been caught there. Q. Have you so heard 2–A. I could not say. When talking about these matters, fishermen do not state any regular distance. A man does not say he caught his fish 4 or 3 miles off shore, but that he fished off East Point or Malpeque, or wherever he may have been. They generally do not state the distance. - sº Q. You have heard that the fleet fished off East Point, and Malpeque, and Margaree, without reference to distance 7–A. Well, I suppose that off Margaree mackerel have been taken inshore; more are so caught there than elsewhere. Q. Did you hear from the captains in the fleet that they were accus- tomed to take fish off the places I have named 3–A. Yes. I knew that they do take them there. Q. Did you hear that this was their custom 3–A.. I do not know that any Special man came and told me he did so, but if I asked a man where he caught his mackerel, he would say at such a place, wherever it might be. Q. Did you ever hear from the captains in the fleet that they took their mackerel at East Point, Malpeque, or Margaree?—A. Well, I have heard of mackerel being caught at all those 3 places, but never heard of them having been taken at any regular distance off shore that I know of. Q. But what you heard from these captains had nothing to do with your taking out licenses?—A. Well, I do not know as it did. When a man Comes to the bay for a trip of mackerel if he does not find them at One place he generally goes to another; and if you have a license you Can go all round. Q. You have stated that you did not do that ?—A. I did not because I found mackerel somewhere else. Q. Therefore you did not want licenses?—A. We did not know what We Were going to do when we took them out. Q. But you had had an experience of sixteen years there ?—A. Yes; but I did not know what would happen sixteen years to come. There is a good deal of difference between the two. Q. Have you heard that of late years the mackerel have changed their habits somewhat, and are found nearer the shore than used to be the case?—A. Yes; I have heard of them being caught by boats off Prince Edward Island, but never so nigh the shore as is now represented. 2374. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. I have been up and down the island, and I have seen boats fishing four miles off and three miles off and outside, I think. Q. When was this?—A. I do not know that it was in any particular year, but it was when I was up the island around Malpeque and came down by East Point. Q. Do you know the distance from the shore at which mackerel are now taken off Prince Edward Island 3–A. No. I have not been in the bay since 1874. - - - Q. Did your experience, then, inform you, or had you heard it from others, that the habits of the mackerel had somewhat changed, and that they were now found and taken closer inshore than they used to be 3—A. No ; I do not know as this was the case. Q. You never heard of it 3–A.. I do not think that I did. Q. But you stated just now that you had heard something about it # —A. I do not recollect saying so. Q. You said that the boats were now taking fish inshore ?–A. I have heard of that since I came down here. Q. But never previously 3–A. No ; I do not know as I ever did. Q. You said you have lost a good deal of money on some of these trips ?—A. No, not a great deal; but I have not made much. Q. But you have made money º–A. I have a house, and that is all. Q. Were you a member of a firm 3–A. No. * Q. You were merely a fisherman 3–A. Yes. Q. For what firm did you go out 2–A. I have fished for a number of firms; the last one was that of Rowe & Jordan. Q. Are you aware whether these firms made money or not?—A. Well, I could not say ; I suppose that some do, and that some do not—on the fish after they are landed. I do not think that the vessels make much money, but I do not know. We used to get an average stock. Q. What would be a fair charter a month for a vessel of 75 tons?—A. I could not tell you. Q. Did you never charter one 3–A. No ; I never heard of a vessel having been chartered at any place for ten or twelve years; but this used to be done. Q. Do you not know what a fair ordinary charter for a vessel of that size is 7–A. It would be about $200 I suppose for a large vessel. Q. But for a vessel of 75 tons 3–A. A vessel of small size for the fish- ing season of perhaps nine months, would cost, I suppose, about $100 a month ; but I do not know for certain what would be the charge. I have not known any vessels to be chartered for a good many years. Q. Did you go to McGuire's or Hartley's when you went to Cape Bre- ton in 1874 %–A. I went to Hartley’s. Q. You are quite sure about that ?—A. We always fitted out there ; we never fitted out at any other place. Q. Had you during the seasons you were fishing, or say in 1874, any British fishermen with you—Cape Breton men, Nova Scotians, or Prince Edward Islanders, besides Americans ?—A. I do not know that we had any in 1874. Q. Do you remember whether you had or not ?—A. No ; I do not re- member all the names of the crew. Q. In 1863, when Campion was with you, had you any other colonial fishermen with you?—A. We had one man who belonged to the island. Q. Who was he 7—A. He lived at Gloucester then, and his name was Frank Chivari, think. Q. It was not Simon Chivari?—A. He went by the name of Frank. Q. Do you remember any other colonial fishermen who were with you AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 2375 during any of the years when you were fishing 3–A. No ; I do not know as I do. We had one or two one year, but I do not know as I could recollect their names. - Q. I would like you to do it if you can.—A. We had one man named Jim Rose, I think. Q. Where was he from ?---A. Prince Edward Island. I think that Was his name. Q. What year was this 7–A. I could not tell you exactly. It was eight or nine years ago, I think. By Mr. Whiteway : A Q. You said you had been to Fortune Bay, Newfoundland, for frozen herring 3–A. Yes; that was 12 or 13 years ago. Q. You have not been there since %–A. No. Q. Are you aware whether the herring are now shipped from there in bulk or in barrels 2–A. We took them in bulk. Q. And frozen herring are invariably shipped in bulk?—Yes. I never knew them to be shipped in any other way. by Mr. Foster : Q. You told Mr. Davies you once saw as many as 200 vessels in Port Hood º–A. Yes; a good many English vessels were in the fleet at the time. Q. What year was this 7–A. I do not know as I could tell the year ex- actly. I suppose it was somewhere about nine or ten years ago; it was at the time of a heavy breeze, I remember. Q. Can you tell how many of these vessels were British 7–A. O, Well, I suppose that nearly one-half of them were so; I should think that these Vessels numbered 80 or 90 sail Sure. Q. They were not all fishing vessels, were they 3–A. Yes; some were cod-fishers and a good many mackerel-fishers. Q. When you were at Port Hood in 1874, how many American vessels were there there then 3–A. The fleet was not very large that year. Q. How many did it number 7—A. I could not exactly tell; sometimes a greater and sometimes a lesser number was there; perhaps there were 40 Sail. . Q. Were you at Port Mulgrave June 25, 1874%—A. No ; we were then at home. Q. When did you leave home?—A. After the 4th of July. We always left home after this date, one year excepted, and that was in 1856, to the best of my knowledge. We then went after poor mackerel. Q. Could the Alferetta have been there on the 25th of June, 1854%— A. No ; I do not think so. . Q. Do you only think not ?—A. No. I owned half of her, and we were on George's Bank at that date. We always go there up to the 4th of July. By Mr. Weatherbe: º Q. Did you call at Hartley’s on the way through 3–A. I think that We did. By Mr. Foster: Q. You did not leave Gloucester that year until after the 4th of July 3 —A. No. Q. How do you know that you were not there on the 20th of October? Where were you then 3–A. In the bay. We might have been going out ë. that date. We generally leave the bay about the 20th or the 25th of ctober. 2376 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. . Q. How do you know that you did not stop at Port Mulgrave on your Way out?—A. Because we never stop there; we never did so in my life. Q. Did you stop at Pirate's Cove?—A. Yes; we always do stop there. Q. Were you in Pirate's Cove on the 20th of October, 1874?—A. We might have been. We generally go out the 20th or the 25th of that month, though some vessels stay a little later. Q. You were in the bay somewhere on that 20th of October 3—A. Yes. By Mr. Weatherbe: Q. You are mistaken about Port Mulgrave; all the part you mention is Mulgrave?—A. I do not know but that it is. By Mr. Foster: Q. Where is the place at which Murray's office was?—A. It was at the place we call Mulgrave. Q. The first date, 25th of June, cannot be right?—A. No. Q. But on the 20th of October you may have been at Pirate's Cove?— A. I could not say that, but we might have then been going out of the bay. Q. What did you stop there for that year 7—A. We had some mack- erel to take in ; some 50 barrels. Q. And what else had you to do there ?—A. We put a few empties ashore to make room for the others, and took in a little wood, water, &c. - -- Q. How many empty barrels did you remove 3–A. As many as We had landed. Q. Can there be any mistake at all about the number of mackerel?— A. No, I do not think it. There cannot be any mistake. We did not make but one trip that year, and we did not have a full trip. I am sure of that. Q. As to John F. Campion, I notice on the 33d page of the evidence, British side, that he was examined and answered as follows: Q. This was in the year 1865?–A. I was then in the Alferetta still ; her captain was named Cash. Who was then captain of the Alferetta?—A. I was her skipper every year since she was built. Q. Were you part owner of her in 1865?–A. Yes, and ever since she was four months old up to last fall. - Q. Was Campion with you in 1865?–A. No. He was never with us save on one trip. Q. Is there a Gloucester captain named Cash 7–A. Yes, but I could not say whether he was fishing that year. I only know one captain of that name. - Q. In 1863 Campion was with you on one trip º–A. Yes, it was on the first trip. Q. Was it the first trip of the year 7—A. It was the first mackerel Voyage. * § Q. Was he with you cod-fishing 2—A. He went on the first trip. We shipped him at the Island after we went down there. - Q. He says you shipped him at Gloucester ?—A. We did not do so; he shipped at the island. * Q. EIis evidence is as follows on this point: Q. And the next year, 1863?—A. I was also then in the fishing business. Q. In what vessel ?—A. The schooner Alferetta, Captain Rowe. Did you begin early that year 3—A. Yes; we started in July. Q. Q. Where did you go?—A. We came to the Bay of the St. Lawrence. Q. Was she a Gloucester schooner ?—A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2377 Q. Did you go that season to the Southern fishing grounds along the American coast 3– A. No. I was in Gloucester when the vessel went out there, but I did not go. Q: Why?—A. Simply because I did not think there was any money in the transaction. I remained idle, as did many others at the time that year. I had never any faith in the South- ern fisheries, because I saw that a great many people who went there did not make much. Q. A good many others were idle as well as yourself?—A. Yes. Q. You waited until fishing commenced in the Bay of St. Lawrence 3—A. Yes. His evidence continues: Q. One-third were caught altogether outside the limits 3–A. Yes. We went home with º trip. I think it was in August we returned to Gloucester. We caught about 300 bar- TelS. Q. He means packed, I suppose; that was about the number we packed. He shipped with us on that trip at Souris. Q. Are you positive about that ?—A. We went to the bay one hand Short; men were not very plenty at Gloucester. Vessels often have to go that way. The cook's wife wanted to go down, and we accommo- dated her; and then when we went in this man wanted to go and we shipped him. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Did I understand you to say you had licenses for 3 years?—A. No ; but for 2 , 1866 and 1867. * Q. In 1866, 50 cents a ton was charged ?–A. I think so. Q. And the next year $1%—A. Yes; and I think the price was raised the third year to $2, but we did not take out any that year, and that is the reason why vessels did not then purchase them, I think. Q. I should like you to state more fully what considerations you had in addition to those you have mentioned, if there were any, for taking out licenses.—A. Well, I do not think there were any others. When we had a license we could go any where without being bothered, and this might have been the case 4, 5, and 6 miles off shore. Q. The sense of being secure whenever you went in the bay was your motive, or part of it 2—A. Yes; I suppose so. I have heard of vessels having been sometimes so bothered, but this was never the case with Iſle, S3, We OIl Cô. By Mr. Davies: Q. During the 23 years you fished in the bay were you ever inter- rupted by the cutters?—A. Yes; once. Q. Where were you then ?—A. Going to Gaspe; this was in 1852 or 1853; I would not be certain about the year. Q. You were then within the limits 3–A. We were not fishing; we Were going to a harbor in company with some 25 vessels. Q. Did they board you?—A. Yes; every vessel was boarded. Q. From 1852 to 1866 you were never interfered with by the cutters? —A. No. By Mr. Foster: Q. Explain what happened at the time you were boarded off Gaspé.- A. It looked Stormy and quite a fresh breeze was blowing when We were working up there. Most of the fleet were there, and the men on a steamer had boarded them and forbidden them to go in ; and when we got there they boarded us and did the same thing. This occurred about 10 o'clock in the forenoon, and we staid round till late in the afternoon ; it may have been 4 o'clock when they told us that we could go in, and we did so. By Mr. Weatherbe: Q. Give the name of the captain of that cutter.—A.. I could not tell 2378 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION either his name or the steamer's name. I forget them now ; it is so long ago, and I do not know that I knew them at the time. No. 35. MOSES TARR, of Gloucester, Massachusetts, fish-merchant and fisher- man, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Trescot : Question. You are a native of Gloucester ?—Answer. Yes. Q. State to the Commissioners what your business and occupation have been in Gloucester; what positions you have held, and the char- acter of the experience you have had.—A. I commenced to go a fishing when a boy. I worked on a farm, and afterwards, early in life, I fished some. I have made mercantile voyages, and have, subsequent to that time, been in a commercial and fishing business, owning and fitting a large number of vessels, and I have held under two or three adminis- trations office under the General Government. I have been president of a Gloucester Mutual Fire Insurance Company for several years, and was, during our rebellion, four or five years doing business at Charlotte- town, Prince Edward Island. I have done most of the different classes of business for New England men. ! Q. So that in various capacities, partially in the custom-house, par- tially as president of an insurance company, partly as fisherman, and partly as fish-merchant you have had a large and full experience of the Gloucester fisheries 2–A. Yes, I have. *. Q. Now, with regard to the mackerel-fishing of Gloucester, has it in- creased or declined in the course of your experience?—A. It has, in the course of my experience, done both. In my first knowledge of it our vessels were small and the catch quite small, and it grew to be an im- portant business subsequent to 1833, 1834, and 1835. About our earliest fishing in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, I should say, for mackerel was from 1832 to 1834. I don’t remember the date of the first catching of mackerel in the bay. I was in 1832 there myself as a youngster, for codfish. I don’t remember knowing anything about any mackerel in the bay or mackerel-fishing at that time, or previous to that time. Q. Then it grew up from that time 2—A. The mackerel fishery in the Gulf of St. Lawrence grew up from about that time. That was the first. We commenced by a vessel or two at a time. Perhaps the two first years they didn’t catch but a few hundred barrels, or a few thousand perhaps, and it grew from that time up to eighteen hundred and some of the earliest years of forty, forty-one, and forty-two. It afterward declined and nearly failed out. I had a vessel that came in, after being there for the whole season, with as low as 30 or 60 barrels. I have known the mackerel to be very plenty on our coast for a series of years and then to run down, and almost no fish; only 100 barrels would be an Ordinary fair catch for the season. g Q. Now, what, according to your recollection and knowledge of the Gloucester business, was the fleet employed in the mackerel fishery in the gulf when it was at its highest ?—A. I should think it was at its highest during the rebellion. Q. What was the number of the fleet employed then 3–A. I should think We had over two hundred vessels. t Q. What is it now in the gulf from Gloucester 7—A. We had when I came away vessels that were considered to have gone there 68. Q. When you say that the number of vessels employed in the gulf AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 23.79 was larger during the rebellion, and that the fishing of mackerel was at its height, must there not have been some exceptional demand for mackerel ? Was there not an exceptional demand arising from the de- mand for the Army º–A. Yes; everything ran high. But I think we had had a larger number of vessels there before, say in '49, 752, or ’53, but not So much tonnage. Q. Then, if I understand you, within the last series of years the mackerel fishery of Gloucester has declined rather than increased ?–A. It has declined; yes. Q. Now, has the mackerel fishery of Gloucester declined as compared With its cod-fishery; so far as the industry of Gloucester as a fishing- port is concerned, what is the relation of the mackerel to the cod fish- ery?—A. Well, I should think the relative importance of the two classes of business, if I understand you aright, would be seventy-five per cent. Codfish to twenty-five per cent. mackerel. Sir ALEXANDER GALT. Are you asking him generally 3 Mr. TRESCOT. I am asking him as to the relations that the two in- dustries bear to each other in Gloucester. He says 75 per cent. codfish and 25 mackerel. Sir ALEXANDER GALT. That is both on the American coast and in the gulf? Mr. TRESCOT. Yes. Q. Do you know what is the relation of the cod fishery to the mack- erel fishery this year 7–A. Well, I should think it was 90 per cent. Q. Do you know what the relative values of the cod fishery and the mackerel fishery were last year in Gloucester 7—A. I don’t know. Q. Now, from your experience in the various capacities in which you have done business in Gloucester, as fisherman, as fish merchant, as president of an insurance company, as being in the custom-house, what Would you suppose would be the profit of fishing in Gloucester; is it large or small ?—A. Small. & Q. What is it derived from, the fishing or the handling of the fish?— A. The handling of the fish. The earnings of the fishermen are very Small for a family to live on in Gloucester, as everywhere else. They labor ten months in the year in Gloucester, and I think that the aver- age earnings of fishermen would be considered good when they averaged $300 apiece. 4. Q. Then, I understand that the profit of the fisheries in Gloucester, as you understand the industry of the town, is a mercantile profit and not a fishing profit 3–A. It is a mercantile profit. The fish are brought in. When the vessel arrives at the wharf they are purchased with a fair competition, there being 40 or 50 purchasers, and the crews are paid off as Soon as the fish are weighed out, and the fish then become a mercantile rather than a fishing interest. Q. Now, with your experience of fishing and what you have seen and known, have you ever been able to form an opinion as to the gulf fish- eries; that is, as to what per cent. of those caught there are caught in deep Water and what per cent. within three miles?—A. I have had some acquaintance with it by my business, and being in the bay fishing for mackerel myself two years, and knowing those who have been. Q. What would you say was the percentage %–A. Well, very small. If I had to set it down, I should say there was 15 per cent. caught Within the three-mile limit. Q. You referred to the fact, as I understood, that you had been living at Prince Edward Island four years?—A. I did. Well, I went home, perhaps, twice a year. - 7 2380 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. When you lived at Charlottetown, what were you doing?—A. My main business was the purchasing of produce. The purchasing of oats was the main business, and as incidental to the business"I have shipped 10,000 to 20,000 bushels of potatoes, and what fish I dealt in, that is, mackerel, not codfish. I competed with two or three others for them. Q. Can you give me the extent of your purchase of fish in any year 2– A. My purchases of mackerel were small. There was a Mr. Hall and one Or two other parties there who owned and were running boats themselves, and their fish came to them. What fish I bought were such as the farmers and fishermen living on the north side of the island caught and brought into market without regard to those places that had stations. I could not say that I bought more than 200, or 300, or 400 barrels While I was living at Charlottetown.' - Q. Are you familiar with the habits and ways of the boat-fishermen On the island?—A. Yes; I have been invited out there to give an opin- ion in relation to the manner of their curing their fish. They were pre- mature in the business, and didn’t understand the business as we did. I used to go out to Rustico, to Malpeque, to Souris, and across the island to Bouche, I believe it is, and those places. I used to see there, and I understand the manner of their fishing. Q. Now, with regard to that boat-fishing, with your knowledge of it in your four years' residence there and purchasing of fish from those people, Can you form any idea from what they have told you, or what you saw, as to the distance at which they caught fish 3 How did they carry on that fishery, when did they•go out, how far did they go, and When did they come in 3–A. The boats there are manned, except the fishermen's and farmers' boats, by three, and perhaps some smaller ones by two, and up to four men. They go about daylight in the morning; between that and sunrise. The distance from the shore depends entirely upon where they find mackerel or codfish such as they are fishing for, and they are not likely to catch them within two miles—seldom within that. Two miles is a very short distance from the land. Sometimes they are inside of that, undoubtedly, and from that they go to three, four, five, six, and seven miles, and exceptionally beyond that. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. When did you say you were living in Prince Edward Island?—A. From the fall of 1861 to the fall of 1866. By Mr. Trescot: Q. And about the character of this fish—you have dealt more or less in them all during that time; how did you find then 3–A. Well, the mackerel-fishing commences its course about the 10th or 20th of June. That would be my judgment. The earliest fish are seldom caught before the 20th of June. Then the mackerel are poor and are like all other poor mackerel, even if taken care of they are No. 3. They increase from that and become No. 2, and when you get along to the middle or the 10th of August the mackerel generally, in seasons of good fishing, are then very handsome fair mackerel. But no one can testify what the mackerel will be next year through the season by what it is this year. Q. What was the preparation of the fish by these people from whom you bought & How did it compare with the preparation by thorough mackerel fishers?—A. Well, we should not sell any of them that time for a fancy article. They were put ashore in the little barns and places where they kept them and many of them were careless with them, and would be a week, perhaps, filling a barrel. While they were waiting AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2381 some of them would be injured. But some that were acquainted with the business cured them comfortably well. Q. Can you give me any idea of the amount of fish caught around the shores of Prince Edward Island?—A. Well, I think the year I was there they would range from 4,000 to 7,000 barrels—not exceeding 7,000 barrels, maybe. - Q. The shore fisheries l—A. Yes; the island fisheries. Q. These fish were bought up by the merchants who dealt in fish and Were exported 3–A. Yes. Q. Who bought most largely 2—A. Mr. Hall and Mr. Carvell—Mr. Hall, I think, most largely. Q. What proportion of them did Mr. Hall get?—A. I suppose he got nearly half. The rest were distributed among such as came into Com- petition for them. By Mr. Weatherbe: Q. When did you leave the island; ten years ago?—A. I left the island—well, I left my business there in the spring of 1866. Q. You have resided in the States since that ?—A, I have always re- sided in the States; my residence in the island was only a temporary home for the season. Q. How many years were you doing business there?—A. From 1861– the fall of 1861—until 1865. Q. Have you read over the evidence with regard to the boat fishery that has been given before the Commission ?–A. No, I haven’t read any testimony. Q. I presume you know most of the men residing in Rustico 3–I am Somewhat familiar with them. Q. Do you know Alexander McNeil 3—A. Yes. Q. Churchill ?—A. Yes. Q. And Marshall ?—A. Yes. Q. These are all respectable men 3–A. Yes. Q. Men of truth º–A. Yes; I don’t know anything to the contrary, as far as I know. º Py Sir Alexander Galt : Q. You spoke of the commencement of the mackerel fishery in the bay as being about 1830?—A.. I think I said 1832 or 1833. Q. I understood you to say it declined about 1841 ?—A. Yes, it fell off, I think, about 1841. Q. Then it increased again until the time of the war 3–A. No, not en- tirely until the time of the war. It fell off again after that, but we were doing as well in 1852, 3, '4 again ; that would be my remembrance. But I think we got as many mackerel in the gulf in the few years of the War as any other time. Q. Now again it has fallen off, I understand you to say ?—A. Entirely; it. º almost entirely fallen off as far as any profitable business is con- CôTL1601. Q. You said there were only 68 vessels this year 7—A. Yes. Q. Has it declined periodically on the American coast also 3–A. Yes. Q. I wanted to ask you just this, whether the fishing is good at the Same time in your observation on the American coast and in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, or whether it fluctuates and is good on your coast and bad in the gulf in the same year and vice versa. 3–A.. I don’t think there Could be a distinct line drawn there, but I think it is sometimes the case that it resolves itself into that in a measure. Q. It is occasionally good on the American coast and occasionally in 2382. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. the gulf, but not usually good on both coasts at the same time 2—A.. I have known it to be good on both coasts, but when we can find it good at home we should rather fish there. A. Q. It has not been very good this year 3–A. No, it is not. by Mr. Trescot: Q. How does the fishing on the coast compare with the fishing in the gulf º-A. With the same kind of fishing, do you mean Ž Q. No; but with the kind of fishing that is practiced, which is seine fishing altogether. How does the seine-fishing on the coast compare with hand-line fishing in the gulf? Is it or is it not cheaper ?—A. With the same quantity of fish taken, we can do it a good deal cheaper at home. By Mr. Weatherbe: * Q. Generally speaking, it is cheaper fishing 2—A. Yes; it is cheaper at home, because at home we can catch 100 barrels to-day and pack them to-morrow. Q. You are only speaking now of the years when it is prosperous on your coast 3—A. Yes. Q. You are not speaking of an average of, say, 10 or 15 years 7 Take the most prosperous fishing on your coast and the most prosperous years in the gulf, there is more to be made in the gulf-fishing 7–A. No, sir; not with the same class of fishing. Q. I suppose you didn’t make up any estimate 7—A. No; but I have it in my mind and in my books. • Q. Had you been in the business of mackerel-fishing on your own coast before you came into the gulf”—A. Yes. a. * Q. Do you carry it on yet 2—A. No ; I gave it up altogether. By Mr. Davies: - Q. When you speak of 15 per cent. of the mackerel being caught in- shore, do you embrace in that the mackerel caught by the boats 3—A. No ; that has nothing to do with the provincial fishermen. I speak of our catch. By Mr. Weatherbe: g g Q. You commenced in 1861 down there in Charlottetown 3–A. Yes; the first business I did there was in the fall of 1861. Q. You had an establishment at Cascumpec }–A. No. - No. 36. BENJAMIN ASHBY, of Noank, Connecticut, fisherman, called on be- half of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Dana : , Śs Question. Noank is situated to the eastward of New London ?—An- swer. Yes, about seven miles from New London. t Q. It is between New London and Stonington ?—A. Yes, about mid- Way. Q. Are you now attached to the United States schooner Speedwell ?— A. No, I am not, - Q. How many years had you been fishing?—A. Forty-four this last April. Q. How old were you when you began 7–A. Nine years old. Q. You are Benjamin Ashby, junior. Your father is living, and a fish- erman 7–A. He is living, but he is too big to be a fisherman ; he has been. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2383 Q. Now, when did you first go in charge of a vessel ?—A.. I had charge of a vessel thirty-three years. - Q. You took charge of a vessel 32 years ago?—A. Yes. Q. That was in 1845, was it 3–A. Before that. I had a vessel built in 1843, and I had had charge of a vessel then two or three years. Q. Did you sail out of Stonington 3–A. I sailed out of Noank, Con- necticut, every time. I never failed to go out of the port, and always from the same custom-house too. Q. Now, in what kind of fishing have you been engaged during this long period 2–A. Halibut-fishing. º * Q. Substantially that has been exclusively your occupation ?—A. That has been all my business up till the last two or three years, until I gave up the business, and gave it into somebody else's hands. Q. Where have you caught your halibut?—A. The majority of them on Nantucket shoals. - Q. What other places?—A. Upon the Georges, in May and June and part of July; and for seven years, two trips a year, I have been over on to Brown's Bank. I have been in sight of Seal Island twice, and Cape Sable two or three times. - Q. With those exceptions, it has been on the Georges and Nantucket shoals?—A. What we call the Southwest Georges. Q. Those are nearer 3—A. Yes. Q. What is the course of the halibut business—when do you leave port, for instance %—A. We leave about the middle of March. Q. Then you go first to the Southwest George's 3–A. Southeast from Nantucket shoals. - Q. How long do you usually fish there?—A. Till the 1st of May. Q. Then after the 1st of May you go to the George's 3–A. Yes, sir; we stay until July. The last of July We are on the northeast part of the George's. Q. Then where ?—A. For the last Seven years I have gone across to LaHave and to Brown's. Q. Before the last seven years where did you go in the autumn”—A. We used to quit. I didn’t know anything about coming over to this Shore at all for halibut. * Q. EIow is the halibut business carried on now from the places in that region ?—A. It is not carried on at all from Noank, because there is only one vessel fishes at all, and she has only been one trip this season. This same vessel was to Mobile all Winter. Q. These halibut you carry fresh to market?—A. Yes, all fresh to . New York. Q. Your vessels are smacks, are they?—A. Yes, with wells in them. Q. About how often do you run into New York”—A. About once a month. One trip a month is about the biggest we can do. Q. What kind of bait do you use º–A. I don’t know how to answer you—whether to say menhaden, hardheads, pogies, or what. Q. You mean the same thing, do you ?—A. Yes; it is pogies or men- haden. I suppose you all understand it. It is one kind of fish alto- gether, but has a good many names. - Q. I want you to state to the Commission how long you keep that bait in ice. You have a special way of icing it, haven’t you ? Now, how long are you able to keep it in the way you prepare it for use 3—A. Well, do you want me to plan out an ice-house 3 Q. No; how long can you use it iced in the way you ice it?—A. Well, the way I have put it up to preserve it I have fished with it when it has 2384. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. stood in ice 33 days, and have caught fish with it just as well as when We first commenced to fish with it. Q. Then you are able, with iced bait, to go out on those shoals of Nan- tucket and the George's catching until you go back to New York ordina- rily. You required no fresh supply 3–A. We never pretend to make any fresh supply. Q. You never did all these 40 years 3–A. No. | Q. Now, tell these gentlemen how you prepare that bait to keep it so Well.—A.. I have an ice-house. The ice is cut 22 inches square in our State the way we take it in. We stow two cakes in breadth and three in length in the house, whether it is 12 inches thick or 20 inches thick. We leave a whole tier in the bottom. Then we take these pogies and put them four inches thick; then about the same thickness of fine ice, as fine as we can pound it—Snow would be better. We put the same thickness of ice that we have of fish. Then we put another tier of fish, and then some ice again, till we stow from 7,000 to 10,000 of these fish right in one house. Then we fill all round the sides and all over the top with the fine ice, and then cover it with canvass to keep it. I have fished with it when it has been 33 days, and it has been good bait to fish with. Q. Now you have a floor of cakes of ice?—A. Yes, we call them in our vessels bed-rooms. Q. What is the depth of pogies you put on ?—A. About four inches. Q. Then four inches of fine ice?—A. Yes. Q. Ground up?—A. We pound it as fine as we can with the axe: we have no mills. - Q. Then four inches of ice, then pogies, then ice again?—A. Yes, we fill it full. Q. What is the advantage of that mode of preparing the ice 7—A. It is all frozen solid and good. The top of the ice, when it gets frozen, bears its own weight, and it is not on the fish. It forms a kind of a crust upon the fish, and there is no air gets through it, I suppose, and it does not make any weight on the fish underneath. - Q. In case there is any melting, what is the effect on the bait?—A. When it begins to melt and the crust breaks away the fish begin to decay. Q. You avert that or prolong the period by your mode?—A. Yes. Q. If the water forms there does it draw up 7–A. No, it goes down. the sides. We have it stowed so that the water that forms goes each side of this house. Q. It runs off?—A. Yes. Q. Is your method of preserving this fish practiced in any other place than your region of New London and Noank º–A. I am not acquainted. I have seen Cape Ann fishermen stowing bait, but I never went in for the science of their stowing it. There is too much wood around the wi- cinity of the bait. I have seen them stowing herring. I never saw them stowing pogies. Q. Now, you say you have been to Brown Bank one trip 7–A.. I have been about two trips a year for seven years. Q. Did you use the same bait, prepared in the same way ?—A. Yes. Q. You had no occasion to go in for bait 3–A. No. Q. You never had 3–A. No. Q. Where is Brown's bank?—A. It is south of Cape Sable, about forty miles from land. Q. You have been about two trips a year for seven years?—A. Yes. Q. Have you been to LaHave Bank?—A. I have been about the same number of trips. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2385 A Q. How far is that from the land, Nova Scotia 3—A. About 60 or 65 miles from Cape Sable, about south by east. Q. With the same results'?—A. Yes. Q. You used your original pogies and menhaden that you brought from home 2—A. Yes. Q. Now you know Cape Sable, and Cape Sable Island 3–A. I don’t know Sable Island. I have never been down there—Cape Sable I mean. Q. How near have you ever been to the shore there fishing 3–A.. I have fished two trips in my life within sight of Cape Sable light. Q. Did you always see it?—A. No ; once in a while; it was a red light; they have changed it now. Q. How often have you been there ?—A. About three times in my life-time, in 42 years; that is the furthest eastward I have ever fished. Q. And you never fished nearer the land of Cape Sable than about 15 miles?—A. No ; I think it was full 15 miles, if it was not more. I don’t know how far you could see; it was very hard to see. It was a red light. Q. How long can you keep this halibut in the wells on board your Smacks?—A. Just as long as we might stay down here in cold water ; We keep them in the well alive; we have had them in the well four Weeks, just as bright as when they were taken from the water. When We go into Connecticut in the warm water they won’t live. Q. They will live off Nantucket Shoals and off the George's 3–A. Through March, April, May, and the fore part of June. Q. Now when it becomes warm, if there is any danger of their dying, what do you do?—A. We take them out and kill them and stow them IIl 1C0. Q. Do you take more ice than enough to preserve your bait 7–A. We have two or two and a half tons generally to preserve our bait. We generally take 25 or 30 tons of ice on the trip. Q. For the purpose of stowing the halibut 3—A. Yes. Q. Do you give them any food in the wells 2—A. No ; I have had them there when we have thrown in a lot of menhaden. We have Scooped them up and thrown them into the wells with the halibut, and I have taken forty-four out of a halibut after they have been in. But We don’t pretend to feed them, because we hardly ever put any food in the Wells. Q. Do you find the halibut after such a long fast just as good as ever ?—A. Do I think he is ? Yes, sir; I think he is the best fish in the World with the exception of the salmon. . Q. After staying in the well he is just as good as when he is caught? —A. Yes; because he gets rid of all the filth, and he is all fish, what is left of him. He is a splendid fish and I like to catch him. I would Quit my meals any time to catch a good halibut. Q. Do the New London people catch fish the same way with smacks? —A. Yes; the same way. Q. And they fish in deep waters?—A. Yes. - Q. Do you know anything about catching halibut inshore ?—A. No ; not unless on the Nantucket Shoals, in shoal water on the George's. N Q. Well, I don’t call that inshore. I mean near the mainland 3–A. O. Q. Did you ever make port up here ?—A. Yes; I have three times— in to northward of Cape Sable. Q. What port 3–A. Stoddart Island. S º That is somewhere about Cape Sable %—A. Northward of Cape a, Ole. e 150 F 2386 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What did you go for 7—A. To ride out two hurricanes, two or three of the hardest winds ever I saw blow. That was in—I don’t rec- Ollect exactly the year. It was in September. Q. Perhaps the Commission may all know, but from what size to what Size do you catch these halibut? I don’t mean you to take an extraor- dinary case, but how do they run ?—A. They run about 60 pounds, dressed ; that is, the head and tail off, and the “innards” taken out. Q. Do you take a good deal of pains to clean them?—A. Yes: very much pains. We get all the blood out of the backbone, and every- thing. Q. How do you do that ?—A. We scrape it out with knives, and wash them with Scrub-brooms. We scrub the blood out of the back bone very particularly to keep them. - Q. If you are going to keep halibut in ice for a long time your suc- cess depends very much upon the pains you take in fully cleansing them 3–A. Yes. - gº Q. So with the success in keeping bait a long time?– A. Just the same. We clean every bony fish. We take every fish when we want to keep them a long time, and scrub the blood right out of the back- bone after the head is off, and wash them very clean. That leaves nothing but the fish and the bone. Q. How long do you think you could keep your ice; for instance, on the Grand Bank, if you wanted fresh bait for codfish, how long could you keep the bait fresh 3–A. I can’t tell ; because I never went on a salt-fishing cruise in my life. I have never been aboard a salt-fishing vessel. I can’t tell anything about that. Q. How do you catch halibut? Do you use trawls 2—A. We use trawls and hand-lines. I call my two hands a trawl. I calculate my trawl would be equal to any other in the vessel. Q. Which do you think the most of for success generally, the hand- lines or the trawls!—A. Hand-lines wherever we have fished. I have got the marks to show about my trawls right on my hands. Q. How is the number now and the quantity compared with what it was any 20 or 40 years ago?—A. There is plenty this year by what I have heard and seen of Our Smacks. I haven’t been halibut fishing. Q. How does this year for halibut fishing on the coast of the United States—I mean the small banks, the Nantucket Shoals, and all around that region—compare with other years 3–A. They are plentier than they have been for 35 years. - Q. When your vessels from your town of Noank have got through the halibut fishing, what do they do 2–A. Some of them haul up and some go south. I have always hauled up when I have got through the hali- but season. w Q. About pound-fishing off the coast of Nantucket and along Rhode Island and Massachusetts, can you tell us about that ?—A. I may tell you the best way I know. I have been in the pound business the last two years on the east end of Long Island. Last year at Elizabeth Island. All we had to contend with was Mr. Forbes, a big man from Boston. Q. Well, he owns the island 7–A. Yes. Q. You didn’t have a hard time after all 3–A. We had a tip-top time after he found out we didn't Want to steal his deer or sheep. Q. He accommodated you, didn’t he, a good deal?—A. His sons came aboard, and they were very polite. We furnished them with bait and everything they wanted. They were very accommodating. All we had to do was to send up to the farm-house and get our milk generally. We furnished them with all the fish they wanted to eat for the summer. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2387 Q. Take the pound-fishing along the coast; perhaps you could describe how the pounds are constructed ?–A. Yes; of course we can. We had fifty-seven stakes driven to set them on, some in thirty-five feet of water, some as deep as thirty-eight feet of water. We ran them in from that on the leader until they came into four feet of water. Q. You drove the stakes in 2—A. Yes. . - Q. How long are they? How high?—A. They are from thirty-five to forty-eight feet. Q. They are laid out in a straight line at right angles with the shore?— A. First you drive these stakes down. Then there is a line rove through the bottom of the stake five feet from the end of the stake, through a hole bored in the stake. Then the net is bent on to these lines, and this net is hauled right down to the bottom. Q. By a sort of cable or chain } Which is it?—A. We have out-haul- €I’S. Q. What keeps them down 2–A. These ropes haul them down, and we belay them to the top of the stake. - Q. Do you have a block?—A. There is no block; nothing but the hole through the bottom of the stake. , Q. How far does this line run out to sea 3—A. It doesn’t run out at all. Q. But how long is the line of stakes 2—A. Nine fathoms. Q. Then at the end you have little openings for the fish to go into?— A. There is the mouth of the pound. Q. Are there not two circular or semi-circular places 2—A. No ; only one, on the inner part of the pound ; there is what we call the heart. Q. That has two openings º–A. Yes; one on each side of the line. Q. So that whichever way the fish are going they will have to turn in 3–A. Yes. Q. It is owing to the peculiarity of the fish that they will not turn a Sharp Corner º–A. I suppose so. - Q. Then in the heart there is a square box where they finally come up?—A. It is fifty to sixty feet square. We slack all these lines up. They are all cast off. We have out-haulers to haul the net right up to the top of the water. The fish are all pursed up into one corner. Q. Now, is that a large business along that coast of Nantucket, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Elizabeth Island 3–A. Yes; the biggest fishing in the world. Q. Has it very much increased ?–A. Yes. Q. How many men does it require to attend one of these pounds 2— A. It took three to attend ours—generally three. We had only one pound. * Q. How are the catches, great or small ?—A. They are great. They catch anything that comes. Q. What fish do you principally catch 7–A. When we first put on the string, we catch halibut and herring or alewives, next mackerel; the next after the mackerel is the dog-fish ; then we catch shark, about 25 pounds average; then shad and the chiguit. Q. Do you catch menhaden 3–A. Then scup after that. Q. What do you say of the scup as a fresh fish for market 7–A. It is the biggest fish in the Fulton market. Q. What do you mean by the biggest fish. It bears the biggest price º—A. Q. Is there any other name for the scup 2–A. The paugey. Q. That brings a high price 3–A. Yes. Q. Is there a great deal of it?—A. Yes; very plenty. But this year 2388 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. they have been very small, and we have taken them out. We have turned out as much as 2,500 barrels of small paugies. They were not Salable in the market, and we let them go to grow big. Q. Does the halibut bring a high or low price?—A. It has run this Season from five to ten cents a pound. Q. But generally the halibut is abundant in the market and the price is low %—A. Yes. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Is the price you mentioned that which you would get for them When you brought them in 3–A. No. Dy Mr. Dana : Q. Now, can you tell me how many vessels are engaged in cod-fishing for the New York market from your town?—A. There are 32 or 33. Q. Solely in that business %–A. Yes; altogether. Q. When do they go to the Banks 3–A. The fore part of April. Q. Where 3—A. To Nantucket Shoals altogether. Q. Now, I want you to describe to the Court whether there is an abun. dance or otherwise of cod on the Nantucket Shoals; how it is as a cod- fishing region.—A. Well, it is very big field for fishing cod. Last year they found them plentier than for twenty-five or twenty-eight years. They have been very plenty all the season. Q. This season 3—A. Yes; they have plentier than for a good many years back. Right through the Summer they have caught them very plenty anywhere from eighteen to twenty-five fathoms of water. Q. How often do they go in to New York?—A. Once a fortnight, about ten trips, from the first of April to the last of September. Then they quit that ice fishing, and along October and November they carry them alive in wells. They generally carry ice. Q. You say they run into New York how often ?—A. Once a fort- night. They have ten trips of ice-fishing and four trips in the wells. Q. Now, how many vessels from New London engage in supplying New York with fresh codfish 7–A. Well, I have looked over the list. Somewhere between twenty-five and twenty-eight. There should be 1]] OTO. Q. Is Greenport engaged in the same business?—A. Yes. There are Dot near so many vessels. * Q. Well, these vessels, you say, are all smacks 7–A. Yes. Q. What tonnage %–A. Any where from 20 to 45 tons. Q. When they have a fare, about how many fish on the average are they able to take in 2—A. About 2,500 to a vessel. Some get more and some less. Some have been in with 4,300 or 4,400 of fresh fish. Q. How much did they sell for by the pound 3–A. From three and a half to eight cents. They averaged about five cents a pound. Q. What would be the average catch to a man 2–A. Well, there are about five men to a smack. º Q. How do you fit them out, on shares 3–A. Yes. They average about three men to a vessel on shares, and a few men by the month at $20 and $25. Q. Has this fishing for New York market with fresh fish been found profitable %–A. No; they make a living. They just about make enough to live through the winter and start even next spring. Q. I suppose generally those eggaged as merchants in it, doing a mer- cautile business, make more mouey 3–A. The men in Fulton market make inore money. There is Where We leave our money. 2 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 23S 9 Q. I think you stated the number and quantity were as large as they ever had been 7–A. Yes. Q. Did you say whether this scup you thought so highly of is abund- ant?—A. Yes; it is plentier this year than for the past five or six years. Q. What period of time are they to be found 3–A. May and June. They are very small this year. We turn them out to let them go another year. Q. But when they are full grown how big are they 3–A. A pound and a quarter. Q. How are the mackerel off Block Island and Rhode Island gener- ally, and off Elizabeth Island %–A. They have been very large and plenty this season. We have caught them in our pounds, and One ves- Sel from our place did a pretty good business to the eastward of Block Island, and between Block Island and Gay Head, which is the western side of Martha's Vineyard. Q. Then the blue fish 7–A. They have been very plenty. Q. What seasons. How long are they there?—A. Well, they are there in the fore part of June till the last of October. Q. They are caught in Vineyard Sound 7—A. Yes. Q. They send them mostly to New York 3–A. Yes; they are all pre- pared for the New York market. By Mr. Davies: Q. I have only a question or two to ask for information. Do you mean to Say that these halibut in the tanks live for four weeks without food at all?—A. Yes. Q. And that they will keep up there?—A. Just as bright as when put II]. Q. In fatness and weight 3–A. Yes. Q. How do you account for it 3 Do they get food in the water ?—A. I don’t know anything about it, but they are just as bright after they have been four, five, or six weeks, and just as lively as when they were taken. Q. Do you change the water ?—A. We have about six hundred holes in the bottom of the vessel. It is right throught the bottom, and the sea washes in through it. Q. Do you say you didn’t know anything about halibut on the Nova Scotia and Dominion shores until the last few years?—A. For the last Seven years. Q. Have you gone up among them at all ?—A. No ; I never was there catching halibut. - Q. There is the Island of Cape Sable %–A. I never went round it. I made Cape Sable light three times. Q. That pound-fishery; what coast is it on?—A. The States of Con- necticut and Massachusetts. Q. Do you embrace Massachusetts in your statement about the pound- fishery?—A. Yes; that is where we fished last season. Q. How far off from the shores do you have these pounds?—A. Maybe six hundred feet on the shore. We run a leader from the shore right off into thirty-six or thirty-eight feet of water. Q. Do you catch mackerel in them ?—A. Yes. We got a lot of mack- erel, some 280 odd barrels, and sent them to New York. Q. They come pretty close in there?—A. Yes; right along. Q. What takes them in 2—A. I can’t tell. Q. Is it bait 2—A. There is no bait you can see that time of year. Q. Are there many of those pounds?—A. Yes. - 2390 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. The whole ground is covered ?–A. Yes; wherever they can drive the stakes. r * {} Q. I want to ask you whether these pounds injure the fishing along the shores or not ?—A. No; the fish are just as plenty now. Q. I don’t speak of this year, for this is an exceedingly good year, but for five or six years along, have you noticed any diminution of the fish- ing along there 3—A. No. Q. Are most of the mackerel caught by the pound along that coast?— A. Yes; about all. There is only one of our vessels out of the State of Connecticut for mackerel. * - Q. How deep are they 3–A. About 40 feet; you have a stake of about 52 feet. - - * - * By Mr. Dana: Q. When you speak of Massachusetts you don’t speak of Massachu- setts Bay, inside of Cape Ann and Cape Cod?—A. No. Q. You mean the south shore ?—A. Yes. - - By Mr. Davies: Q. I simply meant to ask you whether you embraced Massachusetts in the statement that the pound-fishing has not diminished the fish 4– A. I speak of Buzzard Bay. If is South of Cape Cod. No. 37. THURSDAY, October 4, 1877. The Conference met. JOSEPH F. BROWN, of Gloucester, Massachusetts, master mariner and fisherman, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster: Question. You live in Gloucester ?—Answer. Yes. Q. You are 34 years old"—A. About that. * Q. Where have you been fishing this summer ?—A. On the north side of Prince Edward Island, at Tracadie. Q. What is the name of the schooner you have been fishing in 3—A. The Riverdale. Q. What time did you go to the island 3–A. I arrived there the 25th day of July. Q. What has become of the schooner now %–A. She was cast away on Tracadie Beach the 22d day of September. z Q. How have you been fishing this summer ?—A. In boats. Q. Not from a vessel ?—A. No. Q. Did you go up to fish in boats?—A. Yes; we fitted for that voyage expressly to fish in boats. Q. How many boats did you take 3–A. Two seine-boats and two dories. * - Q. How many men 3–A. Twelve men to fish. Q. You fished from what time to what time 2—A. From the 26th day of July until about the 20th September. * Q. Until your vessel was cast away ?—A. Yes. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did your boats catch 3–A. One hundred barrels. - Q. How far off from the shore have you been fishing in the boats this summer ?—A. About three miles, in that vicinity. We have been off as far as five miles, and sometimes inhore. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. . 2391 Q. How many boats are there fishing out of Tracadie?—A. Nineteen, including ours. - Q. What size boats; how many men ?—A. They averaged about four men, I should think. Q. How did you happen to get your vessel stranded ?—A. A gale of wind came up on the 21st. We parted both chains and went ashore. Q. You hope to get your vessel off?—A. Yes; I think we shall. Q. Now have you seen the mackerel vessels there this summer ?—A. Yes; occasionally we have seen them pass up and down. Q. What is the greatest number you have seen any one day ?—A. I have seen as high as 30 sail. Q. Do you know at all what luck they have fishing 2—A. Well, I think the general average has been pretty poor. Q. Tell all you know about that.—A. Well, the highest trip I have known or heard of is 350 barrels, and very few at that. Q. What vessel got that ?—A. I can’t tell you that ; but I can tell you of the George B. Loring that got 250 barrels. I can’t tell the name of one that got 350 barrels. Q. Do you know about the result of the fishing of any other vessels? A. I was aboard the Wildfire six weeks ago. She had got 100 barrels and had been in the bay about a month ; she had 21 men. Q. Any others ?—A. That is all I know. Q. If you have any information about any other vessels, either Suc- ceeding or failing, you may state what you know.—A. Well, I heard that the mackerel-fishing in the bay had been a failure, as near as I can hear. Q. Were you in the bay last year 2—A. Yes. Q. At the same place 3–A. Just about the same Voyage; We Were not fitted quite as well as we were this year. Q. What did you do last year, buy or catch 7–A. We came mostly to buy ; we caught 20 barrels. Q. With boats 3––A. We had one dory and the vessel’s boats. Q. Has your experiment this year been successful ?—A. No ; it has been poor. Q. Would it have been successful if you hadn’t lost your vessel ?—A. No ; we would have lost money if we hadn't lost our vessel. Q. What have been the average prices of mackerel this summer at Tracadie—I mean after it is cured. Give us the highest and the lowest prices you have known.—A. The highest sold for $10.50, that is for 200 pounds of fish after they were cured. Q. What is the lowest ?—A. $3.50. Q. What is the average %– A. About $7.00, I should judge. Q. Now, you have been fishing for mackerel in the Gulf of St. Law- rence in former years a good many times I believe & What was the first year you were in the gulf?—A. The first year I was in a schooner called the Saline. Q. What year?—A. '57, I think, as near as I can tell. Q. You must have been a boy of 14%—A. Yes; that was when I first commenced. g Q. When were you first a skipper yourself?—A. I think in '64. Q. How many trips have you made to the bay as skipper ?—A. Two; last year and this year is all I have ever been master. Q. When you were here before you have been as sharesman 3–A. Yes. Q. But you have been a skipper in mackerel vessels elsewhere?—A. Yes; I have been on our shore. 2392 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What year did you say you were first a skipper ?–A. '64 I think it was. Q. I will just run rapidly through your fishing experience since that time. What was the first schooner of which you were in command 3– A. The Eclipse. Q. What did you do the first year 2—A. We followed the George's fishing until along in July. Some time in the first of July. Then fitted for mackerel on the shore between Mount Desert and Cape Cod. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you take off the shores of the United States that year?—A. Somewhere about 260 barrels I think. Q. Take the next year, 1865?–A. We were in about the same busi- ness—the same voyage. We landed about the same number of barrels. Somewhere in that vicinity. Q. When fishing off the United States coast did you make one trip or a number of trips ?—A. We made a number of trips. Q. What were you doing in 1866%—A. In 1866. I was in Bay Cha- leurs or the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Q. You use two terms. Do you mean one and the same thing 2— A. One is called the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the other the Bay Chal- eurs. The fishermen call it Bay Chaleurs sometimes. Q. It is, the same thing you mean. The whole gulf goes by the name of Bay Chaleurs sometimes 2—A. Yes. Q. What is the Bay Chaleurs proper ?—A. It is a small bay to the northward. The fishermen call the whole gulf Bay Chaleurs. Q. What was the size of the vessel you were in in 1866?—A. About 140 tons. Q. What was her name 2—A. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did she take 3—A. 500 barrels we landed. s - Q. Did you go home with that one trip º–A. Yes; we were here all the season. Q. She was a large vessel. How many hands did she have 3—A. 20 IO €il. Q. Now, where were these mackerel caught 7–A. They were caught at different places in the bay, at Bradley, Orphan, and Magdalens, and around Margaree and Port Hood, around there in the fall. Late in the fall we got up as far as that. - Q. Have you been in the gulf fishing for mackerel since that year 7— A. Not until last year. Q. How many years had you been there before 1864?—A. I had been here four seasons. Q. Taking your entire fishing experience, I wish you would tell the Commission what was the principal ground on which you caught mack- erel. What was the principal fishing ground 7–A. Banks Bradley and Orphan, and the Magdalen Islands were our principal fishing ground. Q. Now, to what extent have you fished within three miles of the shore?—A. Well, but very little. I don’t recollect ever catching but very few fish inside of three miles until this year. Q. When you have been in boats 2—A. Yes. Q. I wish you would explain to the Commission how the vessel-fish- ing is carried on, and how the boat fishing is carried on, and what is the difference between them, as you understand 3–A. Well, the vessel-fish- ing is more in deep water and offshore. They go searching after fish. In the boat-fishing, we lie and wait for the fish to come to us. Q. Can the vessels get fish in the places where the boats usually fish 4–A. Not to any extent. - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2393 Q. When the boats are fishing near shore ?—A. No; never, when the boats are fishing near shore. - Q. When the boats are fishing near shore how do they take mackerel? Is it in large schools?—A. No ; I think the mackerel all through the north shore, so far as I have seen, seem to be scattered and feed on bottom, and all the way we can get them is to anchor. When the ves- Sels come in among us they never get anything at all. They have tried it this year two or three times right in among the boats, but never could do anything. Q. Well, can the vessels catch mackerel enough to make a profitable voyage if they fish in the manner in which the boats do 3–A. No, they Call not. Q. What is the largest number of mackerel vessels you ever saw fish- ing together, that you recollect 2—A. In one place 3 Q. Yes.—A. I think I have seen 500 sail of vessels in Boston Bay in one fleet. - Q. What is the largest number you ever saw together in the Gulf of St. Lawrence 2—A. Well, I think 250 sail is the largest. Q. Where was that ?—A. Around Port Hood and Margaree in the fall of the year, when they all collected there in October. Q. What year was it 3–A. I could not tell exactly, but I think that was 1866. Q. Have you ever fished or been for fish to the Bay Chaleur, proper? —A. Into the bay? I have been there but I never caught any fish in the Bay Chaleur at all. I have been there once or twice. Q. Have you fished in the bend of the island; that is, Prince Edward Island, in vessels 7–A. I have tried. I have been in vessels that tried up the island, but never caught any mackerel to speak of in the bend. Q. Is it safe or dangerous?—A. It is the most dangerous place I know of in the gulf. Q. Why?—A. Such a deep bend and shoal water. It is impossible for a vessel to get out. After a wind has been three hours blowing it would be almost impossible for a vessel to get out. Q. How is it with respect to taking refuge in the harbors?—A. The harbors are very dangerous to enter, except they get in before the breeze comes on or in the day time. They are not fit to enter in the night time in bad weather. Q. Why?—A. They are barred harbors and shoal water. Q. What do you mean by barred harbors ?—A. A bar of land stretch- ing across the mouth. # Q. Have you ever fished in the vicinity of Margaree ?—A. I have. Q. What time of the year 7–A. October, I think. Q. At what distance from the shore of the island have you fished in that vicinity ?—A.. I have fished all the way from three or four miles, but in sight of the land ten or fifteen miles off. Q. Have you ever fished close inside of there 3—A. No. Q. Have you ever fished inside of three miles of the island 3—A. I might have been in within three miles. I don’t think I have caught any fish there. Q. Have the mackerel been found this summer in schools?—A. No. I haven’t seen a school of mackerel since I have been in the bay. No large body of mackerel I haven’t seen. Q. Can the vessels make a profitable catch of fish unless there is a large school 3–A. No ; I don’t think they can. Q. How do you manage in boats? How have you got your 100 bar- rels?—A. I have been out every morning when there was a chance at 23.94. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. anchor, and remained until eight or nine o'clock. The highest number of fish we have caught to a man has been 260. Q. Two hundred and sixty mackerel would make how much more or less than a barrel ?—A. The last we caught, 260 would make a barrel. The first we caught it would take nearly 300 to a barrel. Q. How does the quality of the mackerel you have been taking this Summer in boats range 3—A. They range about one-third 3's, about one- third 2's, and one-third 1's. Q. Pretty good mackerel ?—A. No. I call them pretty poor. Q. Is that a poor average % Eſow does it compare with the mack- erel you used to take at the Magdalen Islands formerly when vessel- fishing?—A. It was a good deal better than they have been this year. Q. Have you sold these hundred barrels?—A. No; I only judge about the value; I don’t know. Q. How have the boats that fished about you been doing in compari- son with you ?—A. They seem to think they have done very well. They Seem to be satisfied. Q. Have they caught any more than you have 3—A. No ; I think we have caught more than the average. Q. Explain how it is that they can be doing well while you regard yourselves as losing money 3–A. They are under no expenses. They are farmers, part of them, and they go out fishing when it suits, so that it is nearly all gain to them. I am under a good deal of expense. Q. Have you ever seen the boats fishing with the vessels in former years?—A. No, sir; very seldom. - Q. Have you chartered any schooners, Gloucester schooners, within one or two years?—A. No ; I chartered my own last year to D. C. & H. Babson. Q. What did you get for her charter?—A. One hundred and fifty dol- lars a month for four months, to go to Tracadie and buy and catch mackerel—about the same voyage as this year, only last year we went mostly to buy. & Q. How were you employed last year?—A.. I was hired. Q. On wages?—A. Yes. Q. I suppose you have no objections to state them 3—A. No ; they paid me $75 a month. Q. To take charge of the vessel and twelve men 3–A. Yes. Q. Did you get anything but that ?—A. Anything except that? No, sir; only $150 a month for the vessel and $75 a month for myself. Q. How were the men paid 3—A. Two were on shares, interested in the voyage, and others were hired from $35 to $15 a month. Q. Are you speaking now of this year 3–A. Last year. Q. You only got ten barrels of mackerel last year. The result must have been unprofitable to the people who took the charter 3—A. Twenty barrels we got, as near as I know; I don’t know exactly. I was told then they had sunk between $1,500 and $1,600. - Q. When a vessel is fitted out for a mackerel-trip, with a dozen men on board or thereabouts, what is the average cost of provisions per day for the men 3–A. About 45 cents. * Q. Do you mean for this year or last year 3–A. I mean these last two Or three years. Q. How does that compare with what it was 7, or 8 or 10 years ago 2–A. I should think it took 70 or 75 cents eight or nine years ago when things were high. - Q. Under the war prices 3–A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 2395 f Q. In what depth of water do you catch mackerel?—A. From five to ten fathoms. Q. Taking your experience of mackerel fishing in the Gulf of St. Law- rence, how much value do you attach to the right to catch fish within three miles of the shore ?—A. Mine is not any. I will never pursue the business again in a vessel. Q. You never would pursue it again 3–A. No ; this is my first year’s experience, and I don’t want any more. Q. Then, you are not employed this year 3–A. No ; I am on my own aCCOunt. Dy Mr. Weatherbe: Q. Where did you keep your vessel ?—A. This season 3 Q. Yes.—A. In Tracadie Harbor. Q. Where was she—on the beach?—A. No ; about Southwest from the mouth of the harbor. Q. Tracadie is a dangerous place, is it not ?—A. Well, the harbor, I. think, is very good. If you go out, it is a dangerous place outside. Q. It is a dangerous place inside, is it not ? Was it not inside you Were lost 3–A. We were not lost. Q. Then it is not a dangerous place inside 3—A. Well, it is not dan- gerous, because the vessel is there, and there is no danger. None of us Were lost at ail. & Q. Is it a usual thing for a vessel to go ashore inside of a harbor 3– A. Well, it is very seldom among our vessels there. There were ten boats on the beach besides myself. Q. But do you know whether it is usual for vessels to go ashore in- side 3 Has it ever been known before ?—A. Yes; in 1853 a large fleet Wellt ashore—American vessels. Q. Inside of a harbor 7—A. Yes. Q. Not since that ?—A. Not that I know of. - Q. Have you heard of any on that dangerous coast of the island since that large gale %–A. Yes; I heard of two the fifth day of last July ; two Nova Scotia vessels were cast away at St. Peter’s. Q. In 1876?–A. Yes. - Q. Any others have you heard of ?—A. No. Q. Singe the great gale %–A. No.; I haven’t heard of others. Q. How many have been cast away on the Magdalens 3–A. Of late years & That I could not tell. g Q. Is it a dangerous place 3–A. I don’t consider it as dangerous as the island, the north side. Q. But you don’t know anything about how many vessels have been Cast away ?—A. Well, I know from the experience I had there. I have had experience there, and I judge by that. Q. I am instructed that vessels leave there in consequence of the dangers of the coast, that they leave there and come to the other shores, the maekerel-fishing vessels—is that correct 2—A. I don’t think it is. They leave there in the fall to follow the mackerel. Q. I got it from a very truthful man, and I want to ask you whether it is so or not, that it is such a dangerous place that they leave it early, and come to other coasts, to the Cape Breton coast, Sydney, St. Ann’s, and Margaree?—A. I think they go to Margaree and Port Hood. Port Hood is the best harbor on the whole coast. That is the reason, Ithink, they go there, - Q. That is the reason they go there 9—A. Well, the mackerel gen- erally leave the Magdalens, and they follow the mackerel, 2396 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. ' Y Q. At the time the stormy weather comes on they leave there 3—A • €S. Q. Then you are not under the necessity of encountering the danger if you are only there in the summer months. You would not say, as a master mariner, that there was any danger on the island in the summer months?—A. Oh, there is some danger. You may have a gale. Q. Well, that is true of this harbor here. I think there have been Some vessels wrecked in this harbor, but as a master mariner, do you say that in the summer months it is a dangerous thing to fish in the bend of Prince Edward Island 7–A. Yes; I think it is a dangerous place for a vessel fishing in the summer, or any season. Q. Yet there has not been a vessel lost except the two " Where were they lost 3–A. At St. Peter's. Q. That is not the bend of the island 3–A. St. Peter's is not It is as nearly in the bend as you can go, as far as I am informed. Q. Then I am mistaken. Malpeque is the bend ?–A. I would not be positive, but Tracadie is about 45 miles from East Point, and St. Peter's, I think, is 11 or 12 miles to the eastward of that. Q. That is, it is nearer the point %—A. Yes. Q. Now, that cannot be anything like as dangerous as the center?— A. Well, that is nearly the center. Q. Well, what time were these vessels lost that you speak of ?—A. The 5th day of July. Q. Well, the master must have been at fault –A. Well, I may be at fault now. Q. I didn’t wish to say so at all ?—A. Well, you judge from that. Q. Were you there when those other vessels were lost 2—A.. I was in Tracadie the 5th day of July, when they went ashore. Q. Was that in the harborº–A. No; they were outside. I was in the harbor. Q. It was in the night?—A. I could not tell whether it was in the night or day. - Q. You don’t know how they came to be lost; you had no conversa- tion with them ?—A. No ; I know they were cast away, that is all. Q. You don’t know anything about what was the motive for casting them away?—A. Well, the wind was the occasion of it. Q. You considered it a dangerous gale, then, in July? A. It was a heavy breeze. Q. Had you made harbor to save yourselves?—A. Yes; we made harbor that morning early. Q. Well, that is what those others should have done. A little fore- thought would have saved them ?—A. Perhaps they could not get there in Season. I have been caught myself in gales of wind right near har- bor, and had to go off. Q. I cannot understand. Perhaps you will explain how you came to Select Tracadie as a place for fishing. One would consider it was not the best place?—A. Well, i was there iast year, and I thought by appear- ances there was a prospect of a very good year's work, and that I might do well. My vessel is not calculated for the fishing business, that is, for the mackerel business to go off shore, and that is the reason I went in boats instead of going in a vessel. Q. Why didn’t you go to the Magdalens or some better place 3—A. Well, I don't know that that is better. Q. I thought, according to your view, that it was 7–A. It is at Some SeaS$)]]. Se - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMESSION. 2397 Q. Why didn’t you go to Port Hood 2–A. We don’t generally fish at Port Hood until late in the fall. Q. The boats fish there all summer, don’t they?—A. I don’t know. F. never fished in boats till last year and this year. Q. When you were about engaging in the enterprise of boat-fishing, did you inquire as to the boat-fishing in any other places?—A. No ; I never made any inquiries at all. Q. You made no inquiries as to the best places, but just simply took a fancy to select Tracadie?—A. Yes; I was there last year, that is the I’623;SOIl. Q. Then in your view you were induced to believe it would be a suc- cess 3–A. I thought last year it looked favorable. Q. Don’t you think you are taking rather too gloomy a view of the future ?—A. The whole mackerel I have got, allowing my Vessel was afloat, would not pay the bills. - Q. Even with that, that is only one year; what did you do when you were here before ?—A. I had made one or two prosperous Voyages, and I have made pretty poor ones, very poor. Q. How many voyages have you made altogether, in round num- bers?——A. Six or seven full seasons. Q. You mean more than one trip a season 3—A. No; never but one trip. Q. Well, how many of these trips have been successful, do you con- sider ?—A. Two were very successful. Q. Were those two early in the period over which you fished 3—A. One, we came early and staid late. The other one, we came in July and went home decently early, probably in September. I could not say exactly when, as it was some time ago. 4. Q. But I asked whether they were early in the period over which you fished; were they at the beginning of your fishing?—A. One was the third year. The other was the fourth time. . Q. Now, if I understand you correctly, you never fished within three miles much 3—A. No. Q. Once or twice you mentioned when you tried inshore?—A. Yes; but we never caught anything to speak of. Q. You never tried more than once or twice º–A. I would not say once or twice, or three or four times. Q. But very few times indeed 3–A. Yes. Q. Had you a license, do you recollect 2—A. No ; I could not tell that. Last year and this year J. Was master. The other years l was In Ot, maSter. Q. Then you don’t know; do you know whether there were cutters?— A.. I have never been boarded by cutters in the bay in my life. Q. During any of the years that you fished, was it forbidden 3–A. Never that I knew of. Q. You understood that you had a right to go in for fish?—A.. I didn’t know. Q. A good many American fishermen, we have understood, have fished at Bradley and Orphan and the Magdalens. A certain number have always gone there. Some of them have done pretty well and others haven’t, and yet they never tried inshore fishing?—A. Well, this year I have known vessels try inshore, and they haven’t done anything to my knowledge amongst the boats. - Q. But you were making losing voyages before ?—A. This year } Q. No ; before. You made seven voyages arid lost money on five of them. But you never tried inshore?—A. Well, we tried and we spoke 2398 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. to the boats and found there was nothing doing. When they did try they didn’t do anything. Q. But you didn’t give it a successful trial, I should say. I may be wrong. Your general fishing was outside 2 Your idea of fishing was outside?—A. Yes; that is what we fitted for. Q. Well, you failed year after year for five years and didn’t try in- shore ?—A. O, we tried it. Q. I asked you how often, and you mentioned once or twice, or three or four times. Now I am speaking of a successful testing of it for a season. What I would like to hear would be some person who has tested it for a season. For instance, we have had vessel after vessel, and witness after witness; we have had a hundred vessels that ran in as close as they could get to the shore, and then drifted off until they got beyond three miles, and then came in again, and repeated the operation, continuing that course of fishing for a whole season. We have had hundreds of them.—A. I don’t think I was ever near enough. Q. For instance, at St. Anns, we had the evidence of the collector of customs, of vessels at St. Anns running in there and drifting off in the way I have described. You never tried that ?—A. No ; I never tried to follow it up. - & Q. Perhaps you might try that next year. It might be a hint %—A. No; I don’t think I shall. I have had two successive trips. Q. You will make money out of these mackerel this year. What will you sell them for ? You bought some at $3.50%—A. No, I didn't. Q. You didn’t buy any this year?—A. No, we didn’t buy any mackerel. Q. It was last year 7–A. We went there purposely to buy, but didn’t buy anything. Q. You were giving the price they were selling for ?—A. Yes. Q. They were selling for $10.50 and $3.50%—A. Yes. Q. You would have made money if you had bought them 2–A. I don’t think so. I would sell mine now for $10.50. Q. There. But what will you sell them for at home?—A. I think $7.50, $11, and $16, is the last quotation. Q. Did you have any colonial fishermen, province fishermen, on board your vessel any time 2—A. No. Do you mean, did we have any em- ployed? No. Q. That is unusual for an American vessel not to have a majority of provincial men on board?—A. Yes; I should judge about two-thirds. Q. Well, does it not occur to you that that may be the reason you didn’t succeed. You wanted a little of the provincial element on board?—A. No; I don’t think we needed that at all. Q. Well, we have had many instances where they have done well and made large catches. They understood where to catch fish. Have you ever heard of the practice of lee-bowing boats?—A. No. I have heard of lee-bowing vessels. Q. You have tried to lee-bow vessels?—A. Yes; I have tried that. Q. You consider that all right enough?—A. Yes. I should consider it fair. Q. Well, it is just as fair to lee-bow a boat as a vessel?—A. I don't know how to lee-bow a boat. - Q. Would it not be just as fair? I don't ask you whether you did it or not ?—A. I don’t know whether it is as fair or not, because I don’t know how. Q. That would not have the slightest effect on its fairness, whether you know or not ?—A. I don’t know anything about that. Q. Suppose I tell you how %–A. Well, then it would be fair enough. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2399 Q. Would you consider it fair, then 7–A. Yes, I would. Q. You never tried it, and never saw it done, but you would consider it perfectly fairº–A. Yes; perfectly fair. . . Q. You have lee-bowed vessels, and would do it again 3–A. I have done that. - Q. That has been in the case of vessels out in deep water, where you don’t succeed ?–A. O, we do succeed sometimes. Q. In five trips out of seven you have been unsuccessful. But in the instances we have had of lee-bowing boats, and going wherever they could get them, they have been successful, and made money?—A. Well, I haven’t done that. Q. Well, I only want to suggest that it may be done, and money made out of it. You say you never tried it, and never saw it done?—A. I never lee-bowed boats, and never knew how it could be done. That is all the trouble there. Q. There are no fishing stages at Tracadie 7–A. Yes. Q. When were they put up there?—A. There are two stages with buildings on them, and two besides with no buildings. Q. When were they put there ?—A. Three of them were there last year, and one was put since. Q. But not before that ?–A. I don’t know. Q. It is rather a new place?—A. No ; I don’t think it is. I do not know. I could not tell you. Q. Are they men who carry on fishing to a large extent themselves?— A. No ; not very large. * Q. Well, there has never been any large dealer or fish-merchant that had stages there like they have at other places?—A. McDonald, of Georgetown, is interested in that one. I do not know how large it is. He has three boats. Q. How many fishing stages are there at Rustico 3–A. I could not tell. I never was in. Q. You never made inquiries?—A. I have madé some inquiries about Mr. Eſall's boats. I know how many boats I have heard he has. He has a stage. I don’t know how large it is. Q. Then, at Tracadie, these boats from the island have done well ?— A. They think they have. ſ Q. You think so, too !—A. Well, they think so. Q. Well, the only reason you think you haven’t is that you are under expenses 3–A. I am under great expenses. Q. What is the expense ?—A. About $600 a month, I should judge. Q. You didn’t buy any fish 4–A. No. Q. Last year you bought very few 3–A. I didn’t buy any. Q. You went there to buy—why didn’t you ?—A. We could not buy to save much, to make anything. Q. But you went there to buy 7—A. I was hired. I had charge of the vessel, and my employers managed the buying. Q. What did you do during the season 3—A. Fished a little in boats. Q. How long were you there?—A. From the 5th of July to the 6th of . August, one month and one day. .*.*. Q. You weren’t in there very long 2—A. No. - * * * * *. , Q. Did the boats do Very well there 3—A. Not in that month. ... ." Q. They did after that, I am told 3–A. Well, I am told they didn’t do anything extra after that. Q. In the fall they did well; they told us so themselves.—A. Well, I could not say for certain. Q. Well, now, you must take a very gloomy view of affairs, because 2400 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. we are informed this is the best year they have ever had except one.— A. Well, if that is the case, why I need hardly go again. I had better give it up. Q. We don’t deny that, and I may disclose to you that that is our theory. Now is it a good year or not ?—A. It has been a poor year for me, Very poor. - Q. Had you made no inquiries about others ?—A. I know about other boats. - Q. All along the coast they have a number of boats. Have you ever asked how many 7–A. No ; I never asked that question. I suppose it would be impossible almost to find out. º Q. No, you would find out very easily. You could find out by reading this evidence. You have never asked how they got on at other places 3 —A. I have asked boats four or five miles below my place, and I have asked them from Rustico, and they have done about the same as we have. By Mr. Foster: Q. What good would fishing stages at Tracadie do you ?—A. No good. Q. There are two or three of them where you are 3—A. Four. Q. You have never been to Rustico Harborº–A. No ; but I have been up as far as to meet the boats. We have been up along the coast right off amongst the boats, and we have met the Savage EHarbor boats. Q. Have you ever inquired of the Rºlstico boats 2— A. Yes. Q. What were you told about the quantity of the mackerel they were catching 3–A. They were doing about the same as we did. Q. Now, what were you told last year as to the success of the boats through the whole season 3—A. Last year, as far as I can tell, it was a poor season. Q. Who told you so 7–A. Most every one. They will tell you so now. The people there will tell you so, the fishermen. Q. What is lee-bowing a vessel, and why do you say you don’t know what lee-bowing a boat is 2 Explain.—A. Well, a vessel we lee-bow under sail for mackerel, and drift with the wind; in lee-bowing we come under the Vessel’s lee and stop as near as we can under her lee-bow. Then we throw bait, and that bait gets underneath the other vessel and tolls off the mackerel; that is, sometimes it does and sometimes it does not; then we drift away from the other vessel with the mackerel. But the boats are at anchor, and spring up. There is no sail on the boats at all. I have never hove to at all. Q. Why cannot a vessel lee-bow a boat at anchor 7—A. Because the boat is at anchor, and the vessel is under sail. Q. Explain why. I do not understand why you cannot lee-bow her. —A. Well, I might shoot up alongside, but I would drift away from her. Q. How long would you be within a short distance of a boat at anchor?—A. I could not tell exactly, but we would drift away very fast. We drift two knots an hour in the vessel I am in. ‘. ..Q. I don’t understand why you could not draw the fish that the boats ...are fishing away.—A. I have seen that tried, and they could not do any- ‘... thing at all. * Q. Why not ?–A. That I cannot say—why not. They didn't get the mackerel away. - Q. Were the boats fishing in a school of mackerel, or fishing for mack. erel from the bottom 3–A. From the bottom. They were scattered from a mile to a mile and a half apart. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2401 By Mr. Davies: * \ Q. Were you there as late as the 22d of September 2—A. Yes. Q. That was the day of the storm 7–A. Yes. Q. Now I want to ask you, for a few days previously, a week or a fortnight previously, did you see any mackerel vessels along the coast.” —A. Yes, the day before the breeze I saw six go up the bight toward Cascumpegue and Malpeque, and that Way. Q. Well, taking the week or fortnight previously, how many would you say you have seen 3–A. I did not see a great many the last week or ten days we were there at all. The last day before the breeze I might have seen some passing and repassing, nothing to speak of. I Suppose it was a month ago when I saw a large fleet. Q. You did not go up along the coast to East Point the week previ- ous to the 22d 2 Did you go along toward East Point %—A. No further than I went in a boat, sometimes five or six miles. Q. I wanted to see whether you had seen the fleet that was at East Point at all ?—A. No ; I didn’t see the East Point fleet at all. No. 38. PETER. H. MILLs, of Deer Isle, in the State of Maine, farmer and fisherman, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Trescot: Question. Where is your place of residence 2—Answer. Deer Island. Q. How long have you been living there ?—A. About 26 years. Q. Where is Deer Island 3–-A. In Penobscot Bay; about 70 miles southward of Bangor. - Q. What has been your occupation ?—A. Fishing, farming, and some mechanical business. Q. What has been, during 20 years, the chief Occupation of the peo- ple of Deer Island 3 Fishing 2—A. Yes, sir; mackerel-fishing mostly. Q. Well, in the 20 years of your experience has there been very much change in the character of the business %–A. There has. Q. How %–A. It has depreciated. Q. What was the average fleet of Deer Island when you knew it 2– A. I haven't any records, but from my judgment I should say perhaps 150 sail of vessel. Q. About what tonnage %–A. They would average 50 tons. Q. What is the fleet now %–A. There may be 25 sail of vessel, and there may not be so many. * - Q. Where has the fleet fished; in the gulf?—A. Years past they have fished in the gulf. Q. Where are they fishing now mostly 3–A. On the coast of the United States. Q. Well, then, to what do you attribute the depreciation; to the fail- ure of the mackerel or of the profit in the business %–A. There does not seem to be a profit in the business. x - Q. In your 20 years' experience of Deer Island, has anybody realized a fortune?—A. No ; not that I know of. Q. You know the neighborhood of Deer Island well ? How far are you from Castine 2—A. 20 miles. yº. Was there any time when that was a large fishing place?—A. €S. Q. How is it now %–A. It is dull, extremely dull. 151 F 2402 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Can you tell what is the general character of the Maine fishing now, compared with what it was twenty years ago 3–A. It is much depre- ciated. Q. With your experience of the fishery for twenty years, what is the profit 7 Is it in the fishing, or in the handling of it afterwards?—A. O, well, it is in the handling of the fish, the principal profit. Q. Do you know anything of the fishing about Prince Edward Island —the shore fishing 3–A. Well, I have been there a few years. Q. You say you were a farmer and shore fisher yourself, at home 3– A. Yes. Q. Were you familiar with the habits of the fishermen about Prince Edward Island 3–A. Yes, I was. - Q. How far out did their boats catch fish when you knew them? What was the average run of their voyages 3–A. Well, I never fished myself in small boats from Prince Edward Island, but I had intercouse with fishermen there. They told me they fished off twelve or fifteen miles. By Mr. Davies: Q. Were you fishing at all in the bay ?—A. Yes. Q. Many years ?—A. Not a great many years. Q. Were you in an island vessel, or an American vessel ?—A. Our own island vessels—Deer Island. - Q. What years did you go to the gulf?—A. Well, sir, I only have the records of two years. I think I was there in 1853, and the year 1856; but the dates of my other years in the gulf have slipped my memory. Q. When you speak of the island fishermen, and as to the distance at which they were accustomed to fish from the shore, you have reference to these years, twenty years ago?—A. No, Sir, inside of that. I can’t fix the date of the time I had intercourse With them. Q. I should like you to try, because there is a little variance between what you say and the evidence we have. What was the last year you were there ?—A.. I haven’t the date of the last year I was there. Q. But you can tell us about what it was, surely & You remember 1853 and 1856 %—A. I have the records for them ; that is all. I don’t trust my memory. Q. Does your memory entirely fail you apart from the records?—A. No, sir, not entirely. Q. Well, if it does not fail you entirely, perhaps you will tell me?— A. Well, I can’t tell you that, I only have the dates of those two years. It would be impossible for me to tell you the last time. Q. Well, the time before the last 7–A. Well, I can't tell you that. I only have the dates of these two years. Q. How many years were you there altogether ?—A. That I don’t know. Q. What fishermen did you converse with ?—A. The boat fishermen from the north side of Prince Edward Island. Q. What part 3–A. French Village, North Cape. Q. That would be near Tignish 7–A. Near about. Q. Apart from what the fishermen told you would you tell this Com- mission as the result of what you saw that the boats were accustomed to fish about 10 or 12 miles & Would you venture to assert that as the best information you had from what you saw apart from what you have said the fishermen told you ?—A. No ; I would not assert that from my own experience, because I never took pains to consider the distapce. Q. I want you to tell the size of the boats they fished in about Tignish, AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 24()3 they were manned by two men, were they not ?—A. From two to three I think they averaged. Q. What kind of boats are they 3–A. Large open boats manned by tWO Or three men. Q. Do you know the honorable Stanislaus Francois Poirier ? He has been a leading man in that section and must have been when you were there 3—A. No. Q. I will just call your attention to his statement and ask you if it. coincides with what you saw yourself when you were there. By the way, I want to draw a distinction between fishing for codfish or halibut and for mackerel. Do you mean that these boats fished off 10 miles fishing for mackerel, or that you were so informed?—A. Not all; prin- cipally. - Q. Perhaps there is no difference of opinion between you at all. I will read his statement from the evidence: Q. As a general rule are these fishing-grounds good for mackerel ?–A. They are very ood. - g Q. At what distance from the shore are the mackerel taken 7–A. From the 20th June up through July and August until the 20th September the mackerel are all caught within two miles of the shore around the portion of the island to which we refer. I have been fishing for these 40 years in my own locality and I may safely say that I have never caught mack- erel outside of two miles from the shore around there. Q. They were all taken within two miles of the coast 3—A. Yes. Q. And your recollection extends over a period of 40 years 3–A. Yes. I was born i 1823, and I began fishing when I was 12 or 14 years of age. I think I can safely say can speak from recollection for forty years back. What do you say to that ?—A. What is he speaking about—small boats 3 # - * S .. Q. He is speaking of the boats that fish around Tignish. Would you venture, from what experience you gained when there, to contradict his statement in that respect 3—A. No, sir; I would not venture to contra- dict his statement. Q. When you speak of the fishing being very much depreciated during the past year, did you refer to the fisheries along the coast of Maine?— A. Yes. : Q. They are almost abandoned, are they not ?—A. Well, very nearly SO. Q. Your island, I think, is very near the line between New Brunswick and the State of Maine 3—A. No. Q. How far from it 2–A. Perhaps 240 miles. - Q. And you think it has been abandoned because you found there was no profit in the business %—A. Yes. Å Q. The years you were in the gulf yourself, what vessel were you in 3– A. The D. R. Proctor, of Deer Island, and the Jane Otis. Q. Were you pretty successful?—A. Not very; we brought out small trips. Q. Where did you fish 7–A. Between Cape St. George and East Point, Prince Edward Island; between Port Hood and East Point ; between East Point and the Magdalen Islands, up to the northward of the island, on those Banks, Bradley and Orphan. - Q. Did you try Bay Chaleurs at all ?–A. No. Q. Your fishing was at the Magdalens and along the north shore of Prince Edward lsland, from East Point to the Cape Breton shore?—A. We didn’t go around the Cape Breton shore, not down toward Margaree. Q. To Port Hood 7–A. Yes. Q. And your catches were not very large?—A. No. 2404 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Your experience was not very extensive 7–A. Not very extensive in the gulf. By Mr. Trescot: \ Q. I think you misunderstood a question of Mr. Davies. He asked you about the time you had been at Prince Edward Island. You told him you could not recollect the date, but you can say whether it Was within six, eight, or ten years?—A. I haven’t been there for fifteen years; I will venture that. - - Q. Now, with regard to another question. You stated, as I under- stand, and as the question I put would lead me to understand, that the mackerel fishery of Deer Island has very much diminished. You under- stood Mr. Davies to apply to the mackerel fishery in the gulf. I would like to know whether, in reply to his question, you meant to say that the fisheries all along the coast of Maine have diminished very much 3– A. They have ; yes, sir. - By Mr. Davies: Q. As regards the gulf, you have not been there for 15 or 16 years 3– A. No ; but our vessels are coming and going there. (The witness, being recalled, said he desired to make an explanation with regard to a part of his evidence, and proceeded to say that in Speak- ing of the diminution of the fishing on the coast of Maine he did not know anything about the depreciation of the fish in the water on the coast, but that he meant to state simply that the business had not been So profitable in catching them as formerly.) By Mr. Davies: Q. The vessels that have engaged in the business have diminished in number 2—A. Yes. -- Q. And the catches of the vessels that are engaged in the business, have they been as large as in former years?—A. No, sir; they have not. No. 39. WILLIAM H. McDon ALD, of Gloucester, Mass., called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Trescot: Question. You were born in St. John's, Newfoundland 7–Answer. Yes. Q. You live in Gloucester?—A. Yes. Q. What business are you engaged in ?—A. Cod-fishing a little, and herring-fishing in the Winter. Q. How long have you been cod-fishing as skipper ?—A. Six years. Q. You have been fishing on the Grand Bank all that time?—A. Yes. Q. Do you take bait with you or purchase it'—A. I am two years taking bait from Newfoundland. In previous years I took it from home. Q. How do the two systems compare together ?—A. I know I have done nothing at all since I have gone in. I always got fish before. Q. Then you have come to the conclusion you won’t go in any longer ? —A. No ; I won’t. Q. What is the trouble %—A. We lose money by going in. Q. Do you recollect what catch you made in the first four years when you used salt bait.”—A, Yes. The first year we got about 3,700 quin- tals; the second year about 3,500; the third year 3,000; last year about 1,800, and this year about 1,400. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2405 Q. Do you own your own vessels 3–A. Yes; part of them. Q. How do you account for the falling off in your catches? What was the matter?—A. We lost so much time going In. Q. How many times did you go in for bait this year?—A. Six times. Q. How much time did it take?—A. We lost about three months this SUlmmer. Q. How were you delayed so much 3–A. The bait was scarce. Q. How long was the longest time 2—A. About five weeks. Q. And the shortest ?—A. A week. Q. Were you there these five weeks because you could not get bait, Or Were you detained from other causes?—A. We could not get bait. We Were going around looking for it. Q. Besides the expense of getting bait when you went into Newfound- land ports, did you pay light-dues 3–A. Yes; here are the bills. (Hands in bills paid in 1877, viz: Light-dues, $23.52; harbor-dues, $2.00; water- rates, $4.90; pilotage, $22.50. Total, $52.92.) - By Mr. Whiteway: Q. Where do you reside 3–A. At Gloucester. Q. How long have you resided there 3—A. Eight years. yº. Previous to that you resided at St. John’s, Newfoundland 7–A. €S, Q. Six years you have been on the Grand Banks fishing 2—A. Yes. - lº What were you doing the other two years?—A. Mackereling in the bay. Q. Up the gulf?—A. Yes, and down at Prince Edward. Island. Q. In what vessels?—A. William Carson and Harvey C. Mackey. Q. You were fishing on the coast of Prince Edward Island 2–A. Yes, and round by Sydney and Cape Breton. Q. Who was the master of the vessel ?—A. John MacMullin. Q: Did you do pretty well there?—A. We did decently well. We got 290 barrels. Q. The first year 7—A. In one trip. Q. Did you make a second trip that year 2—A. No. Q. The second year, what did you get?—A. Two hundred and fifty barrels, more or less. • Q. You made only one trip 7–A. Only one trip. Q. You caught mackerel along the coast of Prince Edward Island and the coast of Cape Breton —A. Yes; not within the limits. We caught In One within three miles of the land. - Q. What limits 2—A. We caught none within three miles of the land. Q. Did you see any other vessels fishing there?—A. Yes, hundreds. Q. Were they on the north or south side of the island 3–A. On the north side. Q. Off what harbors were they fishing 2—A. We fished off Sidney and got most there, and off East Point and Souris. We fished all round there and at Georgetown Bank. - Q. You would run in and out again as occasion required 3–A. Yes. Q. As long as you found the mackerel, you would run in to land and Out again 3–A. We never ran in to land for mackerel, Q. You went up and down the coast ?—A. Yes. We never caught any mackerel inshore. $ Q. What harbors did you enter for shelter?—A. Charlottetown, George- town, and Souris. - Q. Did you remain long in harbor at any time 2—A. Sometimes four or five days. - 24.06 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. They are pretty good harbors ?—A. Yes, good harbors. George- town and Charlottetown are good harbors. Q. Is there any difficulty in entering them in case of a gale of wind?— A. No. t Q. Then for four years you became master, of what vessel ?—A. Henry A. Johnson. - . Was that the first year you went to the Banks 2—A. Yes. . Who was the owner of the vessel ?—A. W. Parsons. . You took your bait from where 3—A. From home. . From Gloucester ?—A. Yes. What bait was it 3–A. Salt pogies. How many voyages did you make that year 2—A. Three. All for salted fish 7–A. Yes. . Did you use no fresh bait at all ?—A. We caught squid on the Banks. There were plenty of Squid on the Banks that year. Q. Did you use any other fresh bait besides that squid 7–A. We al- Ways used small halibut for bait. Q. You made three voyages; did you keep a memorandum of the Catch 7–A. I never did. ' Q. Are you quite sure of the sum total of your catch that year 7—A. Yes. Q. That you took 3,700 quintals in three voyages 7–-A. Yes. Q. What was the size of the vessel ?—A. 59 tons. Q. The second year were you in the same vessel ?–A. No ; in the Carrie S. Dagle. f Q. How many voyages did you make 3–A. Two. Q. Did_you use any salt bait º–A. We used all salt bait. Q. Did you catch no fresh bait on the Banks 7–A. We caught a trifling amount of squid. Q. And the third year you were in the same vessel ?—A. Yes. Q. Did you make any memorandum of the voyages those two years?— A. No ; I did not. Q. Are you clear that the second year you got 3,500 quintals, and the third year 3,000 quintals º–A. Yes. I got somewhere near 3,000 quin- tals the third trip. - - Q. How many trips ?—A. Two. Q. And the fourth year what quantity did you catch 3—A. Some- where about 2,000 quintals. 3. Q. How many trips did you make that year?—A. Two. Q. You used salt bait during those four years?—A. Yes. Q. Your catch decreased during the four years you were using salt bait from 3,700 quintals to 2,000 %—A. Yes. c Q. And what was the first year you went to the Banks using fresh bait?—A. 1876. Q. Did you take any salt bait with you ?—A. Yes; a year ago this Spring I took ten barrels of salt bait, I think. Q. Did you make up your first trip with salt bait 7––A. No. Q. How many trips did you make last year?—A. Two. Q. Did you get any squid on the first trip on the Banks 7–A. No. Q. Did you get any small halibut or other bait 3–A. We had Small halibut; we always get them. Q. Having small halibut last year on the first trip, how was it that you did not complete the trip there ?–A. There was so much fresh bait Com- ing on the Banks that the fish would not take salt bait. Q. There was so large a quantity of fresh bait coming on the Banks, you found Salt bait no good 7–A. No good. i AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2407 Q. There was a large number of vessels coming from the coast of Newfoundland with fresh bait.”—A. Last year they mostly got bait there. Q. All the vessels got fresh bait there last year 7–A. I would not say all. Q. How large was the fleet with which you were fishing on the Banks 3–A. I could not tell you the number of the vessels; it is im- possible to tell that. Q. Do you remember the number of bankers that went from Glou- Cester 7—A.. I do not. Q. You then went in to Newfoundland for bait 2–A. Yes. Q. And last year was the first time 2—A. Yes. Q. Where did you go?—A. To Fortune Bay. Q. In what season of the year 7—A. In June, about first of June. Q. Did you ever try to get bait at ports nearer than Fortune Bay ; at ports between Cape Race and Conception Bay ?—A. It was no use, for you could not get it at any other place at that time of the year. Q. Did you try at any other ?—A. No. Q. You went to Fortune Bay and got herring 3–A. Yes. Q. There was a great number of American vessels in Fortune Bay last Spring, catching herring, I believe?—A. There were not many; I don’t know that there was anybody but ourselves when we were there. Q. You had no difficulty in getting herring %–A. No. Q. How long did it take you to go in for bait, get herring at Fortune Bay and return to the Banks”—A. You cannot do it in less than twelve dayS. Q. How long did it take you on that occasion ?—A. About twelve days. I never did it in less than one week. Q. I am now speaking of the time you went to Fortune Bay, the first time you went in, which was last year. How long did it take you to go from the Banks to Fortune Bay, get bait, and return to the Banks 3– A. About twelve days. - £ Q. Are you clear about it 2–A. I am not exactly positive. I did not keep a log. I never did it in less than one week, and I know I did not do it in that time then. - Q. Do I understand that the shortest time occupied in going from the Banks to Fortune Bay and back to the Banks would be one week 7–A. Yes. Q. Were you in last year any other time except this once 2—A. Yes; I was in other parts of Newfoundland. Q. What ?—A. Cape Royal. Q. For Squid 7–A. Yes. Q. How long did it take you on that occasion to go in, get bait, and return to the Banks 3–A. Two weeks that time. Q. You were all that time at Cape Royal 7–A. No ; I was not there all the time. I was at a place called Torbay. We had to leave there and go back to Cape Royal. Q. You went in Cape Royal first 2—A. Yes. Q. How long did you remain there?—A. I went in the morning and left in the evening. } Then you went to Torbay ?—A. To St. John's, to get money. . Did you enter the port of St. John’s 2—A. Yes. . Last year 3–A. Yes. . Did you pay light-dues there?—A. Yes. . You went to Torbay ?—A. Yes. . And round to Cape Royal?—A. Yes. : 24.08 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. After getting your bait at Cape Royal, when you returned there, how long did it take you to get out of the Banks!—A. One day and night. Q. One night going out 2—A. Yes. I may not have got just to where I fished, but I got on the Banks. s Q. On the fishing-ground 3–A. Not on the fishing-ground. Q. The Banks are all fishing-grounds 2—A. No. There are parts Where you cannot get a fish. Q. Are those the only two occasions you were into Newfoundland for fresh bait last year.”—A.. I was in three times. - Q. Where did you go the third time?—A. To Portugal Cove, Con- ception Bay. - e Q. How long did it take you to get there?—A. I went there direct from home—from the States. - Q. That was your second trip 7–A. Yes. Q. Did you go in for bait—squid 2–A. Yes. Q. What time of the year?—A. About 12th September. Q. You employed the people there to get squid for you immediately On your arrival?—A. Yes. Q. And how long was it before they succeeded in supplying your Wants º–A. It took me about two weeks then. I got on the Banks on the 16th September. Q. With a full supply of bait 3–A. Yes. Q. You then got your trip completed—by what time 2—A. We did not get anything at all to speak of. We got about 200 quintals. Q. And you returned at what time 2—A. We returned home about 7th November. Q. And you were on the Banks from 16th September to 7th Novem- ber 2—A. Not exactly all that time. I was in at Newfoundland when Coming home. º Q. At what time did you leave the Banks”—A. Eleventh October. Q. You staid in Newfoundland from 11th October till when 7–A. On 22d October, I think, I started for home. Q. You completed your fishing for that season 3–A. Yes. Q. This year did you go direct from Gloucester to the Banks, or did you go to Newfoundland first for bait 2–A. We went to Newfoundland, Fortune Bay, first for bait. Q. At what time of the year?—A. We left home about 23d April, and got to Newfoundland about 1st May. º Q. What part of Fortune Bay did you go to for bait?—A. Long Island. Q. Were there many vessels there at that time getting bait 2—A. Three or four. Q. TXid you take a Seine with you ?—A. No. - Q. Were any other American vessels there with seines 2—A. No American vessel ever had a seine there. Q. I am informed that a large number of American vessels went there this Spring and caught bait themselves.—A. They would not be allowed to put a Seine in the water there; they would be chopped down. Q. Were you ever chopped down 3–A. Inever had a seine there, and never knew an American vessel with a seine thére. Q. You have not seen them there ?—A. No ; and I have traded there all the time in the winter time. Q. You have been there for herring in winter ?—A. Yes; during 4 Winters. * Q. That is, in the months of February and March 3—A. Yes. Q. That is, for frozen bait 3–A. For frozen herring. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2409 Q. Is frozen herring shipped in bulk or in barrels?—A. In bulk. Q. You never heard of any being shipped in barrels”—A. No. Q. Then if any one said that there were barrels used it would be incorrect?—A. Of course; it is not so in Winter. Q. Not in Fortune Bay ?—A. No. Q. You never heard of such a thing as a duty being charged on her- ring-barrels used for putting frozen herring in 2—A. No ; I never did. Q. We had a witness here the other day who stated that on empty bar- rels used for putting herring in a duty was charged.—A. They do pay a duty on the barrels into which they put herring, but not frozen herring. Q. You never heard of frozen herrings being put in barrels 3–A. I have seen them put in barrels at Grand Manan, not at Newfoundland. Q. Did you get your bait at Newfoundland soon after you went down 2 —A. No ; there was quite a delay this spring before we got bait. Q. You got it at Long Harborº–A. Yes; it was very scarce. It was four or five days before we got bait. Q. Before you could get the people to catch the bait for you?—A. Yes; there was very little there to catch ; it was very scarce. Q. Then you proceeded to the Banks; did you catch a good trip with that quantity of bait 3–A. No. Q. How much bait did you take with you ?—A. About 45 barrels. Q. How much did you pay for it 2—A. $62. Q. You fish altogether with trawls, I suppose ?—A. Yes. Q. A great number of vessels were fishing round you in the same way With trawls 3–A. Yes. Q. The large quantity of fresh bait scattered on the fishing-grounds, I Suppose, has a tendency to keep the fish well on the ground 2–A. The Bank fish never go off the grounds and never leave the Banks. There is plenty of proof of that. The shore fish of Newfoundland would not be liked in the States. & Q. What is the difference between the shore and Bank fish 7–A. In the shore fish the nape is black, and that would not do for our market. Q. What is its color in the Bank fish 7–A. White. - Q. Are they otherwise exactly alike 3–A. No; they are not alike at all. What you get inshore are small fish. Q. Have you ever fished at the western part of Newfoundland, round Fortune Bay and that portion of the coast 2—A. No. h Q. Then you have not seen the large fish they take there ?—A. Yes; I {}V 63, - Q. Have you ever fished off Cape St. Mary's 2—A. Yes. Q. Are not the fish caught there large fish 3–A. They are large, but are not the same as the Bank fish. A cargo was caught there by one of the American Schooners six years ago, but it was never sold. It was Caught by One of Mr. Lowe's Schooners. Q. There has lately been some of the American vessels fishing at St. Mary's 3–A. I have not seen any. ºne fish caught off Cape St. Mary’s are not like the Bank fish 7– . A. No. g Q. Are the fish caught at parts of the coast further west like Bank fish 3–A. I never fished further westward than Cape St. Mary’s. Q. You say there is a difference in Bank and shore fish in other re- Spects than that One has a black nape and the other a white nape 2–A. There is a difference in every way. - Q. In what other respect?—A. The shore fish is not nearly so thick, not nearly so fat, and has a black nape. Q. Anything else 3—A. No. 2410 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. They have each the same number of fins 3—A.. I suppose so. I never Counted. Q. But you are a great authority on codfish 7–A. Yes; I know about Codfish. Q. You noticed the size and thickness of the fish and the color of the nape, and yet you cannot say how many fins they have 3—A. No. Q. Will you undertake to say that the Bank fish have not got a fin Over and above the shore fish 3–A. No. Q. Upon getting out on the first trip to the Banks you said you did not complete your codfish voyage %–A. No. Q. You came into Newfoundland again 3–A. I came to Fortune Bay agall). z Q. About what time was that ?—A. About the 1st June. Q. You got your herring, in how long”—A. It was just exactly two Weeks till I got on the Banks again. Q. Did you then complete your voyage"—A. No. Q. Did you go in again 7–A. Yes. Q. Where did you go?—A. To Cape Royal. Q. To any other place?—A. No. Q. How long were you at Cape Royal 7–A. Just one week going in and Coming out again. Q. TXid you go in again 3–A. Yes. Q. When 7–A. In July some time. Q. Where did you go then 3–A. To Cape Royal again. . Did you go to any other places, or did you get bait there and go Out again 7–A. We went to the Bay of Bulls next time. . Did you go to any other place besides the Bay of Bulls?—A. No. . How long were you in there?—A. Something over one week. Were you in after that ?—A. Yes. - When 3–A. In August. Where did you go?—A. To Saint John’s first. And out again from there?—A. To Portugal Cove. How long were you there?—A. Over two weeks. Did you go in again 3–A. I was in about the last of August. Where did you go then 3–A. I could not tell you all the places. ent to Saint John's and other places. Q. How long were you then 3–A. Something over five weeks. . Did you get bait.”—A. We got some salt squid, no fresh squid. . You returned to the Banks 7–A. Yes. Q. And did you complete your voyage at the Banks?—A. I am right from the Banks going home. Q. What quantity have you got ?—A. 1,500 quintals. Q. Just now you said it was 1,400 quintals?—A. It is between 1,400 and 1,500 quintals. I cannot say exactly. Q. Then you made one trip this year 2—A. Yes. l Q. That is between 23d April, when you left Gloucester, and the . present time 2—A. Yes, one trip. - Q. Were you not talking a little at random when you said you had spent half your time in getting fresh bait 3–A.. I think I did spend half my time. & Q. I believe all American vessels leaving Gloucester in the spring go down to Fortune Bay, in the first place, to get bait"—A. Not all of them. º Q. The great majority?—A. A good many of them. Q. On the way to the Banks?—A. Yes, I suppose so. Q. And those which do not go into Newfoundland get their bait some- Q H W § AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 24.11 where on the Nova Scotia coast 2—A. I don't know exactly where. I Suppose they get it somewhere round the shores on their own coast, or Some other place. Q. And you say that the greater number, in fact nearly all American Vessels, went into the Newfoundland coast this year for bait 2—A. Yes. By Mr. Trescot: Q. You say you are on your way home from the Banks 7–A. Yes. Q. When did you get into Halifax %–A. Last night. Q. What brought you here; did you come for a harbor ?—A. Yes. Q. Have you been in the habit of going to Grand Manan for her. ring 3–A. I never was there. By Mr. Whiteway : Q. Do not a great number of American vessels anchor in Freshwater Bay instead of going into the Port of St. John's 2—A. I don’t know. I SaW a couple anchored there this summer. I anchored in the Narrows myself, and was charged for anchoring. By Mr. Trescot: Q. What were you charged ?–A. Six dollars. I was fined. By Mr. Foster: Q. What were you fined for ?—A. I was fined for anchoring in the Narrows. There was no wind, and we could not get in. By Mr. Whiteway : Q. Were you not obstructing navigation, and was it not the harbor- master's boat which went out to you ?—A. Yes. Q. You were liable to be fined for obstructing navigation ?—A. There Were three vessels lying there. There was plenty of room for any other vessels to go in. Q. And you were ordered out 2—A. We went out. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. You Spoke about going into Georgetown and Charlottetown Har- bors?—A. Yes. Q. They are at the southern side of Prince Edward Island 2–A. Yes. Q. Have you ever been in the harbors on the north side 3–A. No ; I have been in no harbors except on the south side. * Q. Are those quiet harbors ?—A. Yes. By Mr. Whiteway: - Q. Were you in Fortune Bay in January when you went for frozen herring 2—A. I think on the 2d of January. *A. No. 40. WILLIAM A. DICKEY, of Belfast, Maine, fisherman, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, examined. Py Mr. Dana : Question. When did you begin to go fishing 2—Answer. I commenced in 1858; I went as a hand, as sharesman. - Q. At that time were there many vessels from Belfast engaged in the fishing business %–A. Ten or twelve sail. Q. Fishing for cod and mackerel ?—A. Yes. * Q. What has become of the mackerel trade and fishermen of Belfast? 24.12 AWARD OF • THE FISHERY COMMISSION. *a. —A. There are but two of us who fish for mackerel with vess?ls of any size; that is, excepting small vessels. -- • . Q. Are your mackerel-men now mainly engaged in fishing on the American coast'?—A. They have been for the last six years. Q. You went into the bay-fishing in 1858. Do you know for how many barrels the vessel fitted?—A. The vessel fitted for 400 or 500 barrels. Q. And you caught how many 3–A. About 270 barrels, I think. Q. Did you catch any fish inshore then 3–A. I was a boy, a young fellow, and I don’t remember particularly. We caught part of them inside the lines. We fished inshore and off, but the whole quantity we caught inshore I don’t remember. Q. In 1859 did you go fishing again 3–A. Yes. Q. Were you in the bay ?—A. Yes, one trip, late. Q. Do you recollect how many you caught º–A. From one hundred and forty to one hundred and fifty barrels. Q. Were any of those caught inshore ?—A. That year we fished alto- gether at Bank Orphan, or pretty much so. We may have caught a few inshore. I cannot say the quantity. Q. From 1860 to 1865 where were you fishing 2—A. For those five years I was skipper of the same vessel, fishing on our shores. I fished for Cod one trip in the spring and afterwards on our shores. Q. You made one trip in the early spring for cod 3–A. Yes. Q. Where did you go?—A. To Western Banks and Banquero. Q. What kind of bait did you have 3—A. Salt clams. Q. No fresh bait 3–A. No. - Q. How long were you generally on the Banks 7–A. We generally left home 25th or 27th April and got back generally before 4th July. Q. And then you went mackerel-fishing on your own coast 7–A. On Our Own shores. Q. What part of the American shore did you fish on ?—A. We fished from Mount Desert Rock to Cape Cod. Q. With menhaden bait 2–A. Yes; with salt bait, - Q. Do you come into port often ?—A. We harbor occasionally when there is a wind. Q. I mean do you land your fish?—A. Yes; we land them whenever We get a voyage; sometimes two or three times and sometimes not more than twice. Q. You could go in often enough to get fresh pogies and menhaden if you wished?—A. We never use fresh bait for mackerel, but salt bait altogether. Q. After 1865 did you go in the bay again?+-A. I could not say Whether the next time was in 1865 or 1866. I know it was the last year the treaty was on. Q. You had a right then to go where you liked ?–A. Yes. Q. Did you catch any mackerel inshore ?—A. We caught a few at Margaree and at Magdalen Islands that year. We fished some at Margaree. • Q. Did you make any attempt to fish inside the line 7–A. At the Magdalen Islands there were no fish inside. We were out some distance. Q. Did you know that fact by trying yourself or by reports, or by both?—A. We tried in and off shore. Q. That year there was no fish inshore?—A. We did not get any in- Shore at Magdalen Islands. At Margaree we probably fished inshore, Within two, three, or four miles. Q. When did you next go to the bay?—A. I skipped one or two years. I am not certain but that I staid at home and went cod-fishing a trip AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2413 and mackereling. The first year after the treaty was up I was at home. I am certain of that. - Q. You mean you went cod-fishing 2—A. Yes. Q. What else did you catch 3–A. I was catching menhaden for oil, I think, that year. Q. Are there plenty of menhaden to be found on your coast 2–A. Yes. Steamers get each from 25,000 to 26,000 barrels almost every year. I think there are 31 steamers this year. Q. Where do they take the pogies. Is there a place to manufacture the oil near Portland 7–A. There are several of them there, and at Round Point and Booth Bay. Q. When did you next go into the bay ?—A. 1867 or 1868, I don’t know which ; 1867, I think, but I could not be certain. Q. What did you catch 2—A. Mackerel. Q. How many trips did you make 2–A. Two trips; we landed one Small trip and sent it home. - Q. What did you catch the first trip 7–A. I think 190 or 200 barrels. Q. What did you get the second trip 7–A. About 70 barrels I think We carried home. Q. Out of those 260 barrels, how much did you catch inshore ?—A. We, perhaps, might have caught 40 barrels. We fished some inshore and some off shore. We had a license that year. Q. Having a license, you tried inshore, did you ?–A. Yes, we tried inshore; but the fishing was not as good inshore, and there was better fishing off shore; and we got the greater part of them off shore. Q. Do you mean there were more fish off shore, or was it in regard to their fatness %–A. There were more off shore. Q. You did not catch enough inshore to pay the license?—A. I don’t remember whether We did or not. Q. Were you master then 3–A. Yes. - Q. You tried the inshore fishing?—A. Yes; we tried it when we were inshore. - Q. Take the next four years, where were you fishing?—A. I don’t re- member whether I was in the bay next year or not. In 1869 or 1870 I think I was in the bay. Q. Did you have a license 2–A. No, we had no license then. Q. You had a license only one year 7—A. Yes. • Q. Were you cod-fishing during the next four years at all?—A. No. Q. Only catching mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. Generally, where did you catch your fish when you were in the bay ?—A. We caught some at Magdalen Islands, and from Point Miscou to North Cape and Bank Bradley. •. Q. During that period of time where did you find your largest and best fish 3—A. We fished on what we call the West shore, between Point Es- euminac and northward of North Cape, ten or twelve miles out. We did the best there, I think. Q. During the whole of the four years, where did you find any fish inshore ? Did you try inshore ?—A. I was only two of those four years in the bay, and the other two I was on our shores; I think in 1869 and 1870 or 1868 and 1869 I was in the bay. - Q. During those two years, where did you find your best fishing—with- Out regard to particular localities—inshore or out 3–A. We found the best fishing off shore. We did not find any vessels inshore at all. We were in a new vessel, the cutters were there, and we did not try inshore at all. We fished at Magdalen Islands. Q. Did you find satisfactory fishing 2—We got a fair trip, though we 2414 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. did not fill all our barrels. We got 215 barrels, I think; one trip, and 190 barrels the second trip. Q. That is pretty good fishing ?—A. Yes, good fishing. Q. Since 1871 where have you been fishing 3–A. I have been seining On Our shores. Q. At what parts of the American coast 2—A. From Mount Desert Rock to Cape May, Delaware. We commence there in the spring and Work eastward. Q. Were you fishing inshore or out or both along the American coast 3—A. Off shore and inshore. Q. How many have you taken there ?—A. We took all the way from 350 to 1,000 barrels. Last year we had about 1,000 barrels. Q. You had good luck on the American coast 3–A. Yes, we have had good fishing there for five or six years. Q. How has it been this year 3–A. There was good fishing early this year, in May, South. Since then there has been very little done. Q. At what time did you come into the bay this year 7—A. 10th Au- gust. Q. Are you in Halifax with your vessel ?—A. Yes. Q. For a harbor 7—A. We came into harbor last night. Q. You did not come to Halifax as a witness %–A. No. Q. Were you homeward bound when you made Halifax %–A. Yes. Q. How many barrels have you got?—A. From 118 to 120 barrels. Q. During all the time you have been cod-fishing, you say you have gone to the Banks in Spring and to your own coast in summer ; have you been in for fresh bait 3––A. We did not used to go in for bait then. I have not been cod-fishing the last nine years or longer. Q. While you were fishing you used salt bait altogether ?—A. Yes. Q. Do you know anything about weir and pound fishing on the coast of Maine 3—A. I never was engaged in Weir or pound fishing. Q. You have seen it 2––A.. I have seen a number of pounds. Q. And heard about it 2––A. I have heard there is a considerable Quantity taken. - Q. You cannot give any account of it 3–A. No. By Mr. Doutre : - * Q. How many times have you been in the bay ?——A. About six or Seven times. * Q. Six or seven different seasons or trips ?——A. Different seasons. Q. And sometimes you went two trips in one season 2—A. We have landed and sent home a trip, but I have never been home and back On a second trip. p Q. Where did you land any trip 7––A. We landed a trip the first year I was in the bay at Cascumpegue. That is about 19 years ago. Q. How did those fish reach home?——A. They were shipped home by a VeSSel. r Q. Have you ever fished on the coast of Gaspé 7––A. I never fished On the coast of Gaspé. I have been there twice. * Q. You never tried to fish there ?—A. No. Q. Why did you go there if you did not intend to fish?—A. We went into Gaspé from Bonaventure for water. We fished broad off on Bona- Venture Bank, about southeast, 40 or 50 miles, • Q. Was the Gaspé coast nearest ?—A. There was not much difference between that and North Cape, I think. - Q. Do you ever fish in Bay Chaleurs?—A. I never fished there, but I have laid inside of the point about Shippegan. We caught a few mackerel there one year. t t - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2415 * .# Q. How far from the shore ?––A. From two to five or six miles. Q. Do you remember the number of barrels you caught there ?—A. We caught one day off Shippegan, I think, 25 barrels. Q. Did you ever fish in the Bend of Prince Edward Island %–A. Very little. I heaved to twice off Cascumpegue. I never liked the place to fish. Q. Did you not find fish there ?—A. Not many. Q. How far from the coast were you when you tried ?–A. We tried inside of two miles and from that to seven or eight miles off. - * Q. Did you fish on the coast of Cape Breton ?—A. Very little; a very little at Margaree. Q. How far from Margaree were you when you fished ?–A. Probably from one mile to four or five miles off. Q. IS that a good place for mackerel ?—A. It is a good place some- times in the fall. It used to be some years ago. - Q. In what portion of the year did you fish there, fall or summer ?— A. I fished there a little while in summer the year I was there. Q. How many barrels did you catch there ?—A. I might have caught, 20 or 25 barrels there. I was probably there three or four or two or three days. Q. You have fished at the Magdalen Islands?—A. Yes; round the Magdalen Islands parts of two years. Q. How far from the coast did you find the mackerel?—A. The years We were there we got them ten or twelve from the islands—the main body of the fish. Q. None nearer?——A. Some we got within two or five miles, all the way from three to fifteen miles, but we fished principally ten or twelve miles off. That was in 1865. Q. Where did you go to fish for cod?—A. We went on Western Banks and Banquero. - Q. Did you take your bait with you?—A. Yes. Q. You did not buy any ?—A. No ; we carried salt clams when I Went. Q. How long ago is that ?—A. I have not been for nine or ten years. Q. Do you mean to say you never fished for mackerel otherwise than with salt bait º–A. No ; we never use fresh bait as heave bait. We use mackerel to put on our jigs, but for trawl bait we use salt bait al- together. Q. When you fish on your own coasts, do you fish with salt bait'— A. Yes; for mackerel we do. Q. Is not fresh bait better ?—A. No, I don’t know that it is. I never used it very often ; not for mackerel. - Q. At North Cape what quantity did you take within two or three miles of the shore ?—A. We fished about 12 miles to the northward of North Cape. - Q. Was that the nearest point to North Cape you fished ?—A. We have fished nearer than that. We have tried all the way from inshore to out, but the principal part of the fish we caught out to the north, ex- cept this year, when we fished pretty handy in. Q. You have come in from the bay ?—A. We have been in the bay this year. Q. Where did you catch your fish 7–A. This year we caught the prin- cipal part of our fish from Escuminac to Port Hood. We fished Some from West Cape to North Cape; we caught a few fish at East Point, and a very few at Port Hood. Q. How far from the shore ?—A. We caught half, nearly half, I should 2416 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. say, inside of two or three miles; some within one mile, and from that out to eight miles. Q. You caught half of them within those distances from the shore?— A. I should say that this year we got one-half our fish inside of two or three miles of the shore. - Q. How long did it take you to catch those 120 barrels 7--A. We went through Canso on 10th of August, and have been fishing ever SIIT C62. Q. Did you ever try fishing round Canso?—A. We tried as we went. We tried off Port Hood a couple of days. At East Point we tried, and went from there to North Cape and tried there, and got a few mackerel, and We went from there to Escuminac and back again. Q. Try to remember where you caught your fish this year, and tell the Commission exactly what proportion you took within three miles of the shore ?—A.. I think about one-half. i Q. Not more than one-half?—A. I think not more than one-half. Ou best fishing was off Escuminac. We struck the fish when we were within sight of the top of the light, eight or ten miles out. We got fifty or sixty barrels off there the first week; we caught nearly all of these out- side of three miles. We worked in, and the last few days we were in the bay we were inside of three miles. I think we took 30 or 40 barrels out Of those 50 or 60 Outside. w Q. How many men composed your crew 2–A. Twelve. Q. Was any British subject on board?—A. Yes; we had one. . Did you leave him at home, or have you got him still with you?— A. We took him from home, and we have him now. What is his name?——A. Lawrence Tuanderkin. Is he from Canso?—A. No ; he belongs to Newfoundland. Where did you take him 3–A. I shipped him in Portland. . Did you see other American fishing-vessels while you were there? —A. Yes; there have been quite a number. * : - Q. How many did you see there together?—A. We saw all the way º three to fifty-odd sail; American vessels and several English ves- S01S. Q. And they fished like you, inside, when they could find fish, and also outside 3–A. They all fished together, inside and out. Q. And they took about the same proportion, one-half of their catches inshore?—A. Yes; about the same. Q. Do you think you did not take three-quarters of your catch in- shore ?—A. Not this year, or any other year. Q. Other years what was the proportion ?—A. I think we caught about three-quarters outside, and this year we caught fully one-half in- side, or near about that. I kept no particular account of them, because it did not matter to me one way or the other. Q. You say you saw about 50 sail fishing there 2—A. There were about 50 sail one day, and the rest of the time 3, 5, or 8, along there. Q. They have all taken tolerably good catches?––A. No ; they have all done very slimly, or the greater part of them. - Q. You admit that you have not been very lucky 3–A. We have done about an average of the fleet, I should say. Q. And the other vessels have done about the same as you ?—A. Some have got more and others have not got one-half or one-fourth. Some have got double what we did. Q. And some, I suppose, three times what you did 3–A. Some ves- Sels which went in early have got double what I have ; but some which went in when I did have not got more than half. Q ; AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 24.17 Q. Did you hear of any vessels having 300 or 400 barrels 2—A. No ; I have not heard of vessels having 400 barrels. I heard of a vessel hav- ing 290 barrels. She is a large vessel and had a crew of 17 men, and had been in the bay all summer. Q. Do you know the schooner Lettie 7–A. I know the schooner Let- tie belonging to Charlottetown. Q. Do you know Captain Macdonald 7–A. No. Q. Do you know how many barrels the Lettie caught 3–A. No. I do In Ot. - Q. Did you see her fishing with you ?—A. I don’t remember seeing her this year. * Q. Have you not heard from fishermen that she caught 500 barrels?— A. I have not heard anything about it. Q. Have you seen any British vessels on the American coast fishing this year 7–A. Yes. Q. How many have you seen 3–A. I did not see but one. Q. Do you remember her name 7–A. No. I recollect seeing one. Q. Do you know the name of her captain 7–A. No. By Mr. Dana: Q. This year, 1877, you think you have given a fair trial to inshore fishing 2—A. Yes; we had a good trial of it, I think. Q. You did your best with it 2–A. Yes; we tried inshore. Q. You caught from 118 to 120 barrels fishing inshore and outside 7– A. Yes. - Q. And how many packed barrels will they make 2–A. They will probably pack one hundred and seven or one hundred and eight. - Q. How much did the vessel fit for ?—A. We only fitted for 200 bar- rels this fall trip. Q. As a commercial and money matter, is that bad or good?—A. It is a poor trip. * Q. A losing one º–A. It is losing money. Q. Will it be a pretty considerable loss %—A. For the time we were Catching them, not much loss, but no money. Q. It will not pay ?—A. It will not pay. Fishing will not pay any- Where this year, I guess. * Q. Were there any places where there was reported to be good inshore fishing which you did not try º–A. The boats have done very well in- Shore, anchored, but we could not fish among them. The boats have done very well at Miminegash, Prince Edward Island, this year. They have done as well as they have done for some time. The boats, at Cas- Cumpeque have done very slimly this year, I have been told. The boats fish inshore to an anchor. Q. Was there any place where vessels went inshore which was re- ported to you to have good fishing that you did not try 2—A. I did not See or hear of any. - Q. Is there any place where vessels went where they have done well inshore ?—A.. I have not heard of it. The principal part of the fish this year has been caught inshore, as nigh as I can judge. Q. Do you know by direct report or otherwise of any vessels fishing inshore or off shore that have done well this year?—A. Some vessels that went early got good, fair trips; 5 or 6 vessels did that went in the bay in July; but those are the only ones I have heard of. Nothing was done since we went in ; the vessels did not do anything in August. Q. You said, in answer to one of the counsel, that you did not like the bend of the island. Why is'this the case?—A. I have not made a 152 F 24.18 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. practice of fishing there, any longer than with a good wind we could go from one end of it to the other, going or coming. Q. What is the reason?—A. It is because it is a bad place, and I did not like to stop there. It is well enough, however, close to North Cape and East Point, where you can watch your chance to get round when there comes a northeaster. By Mr. Doutre : Q. I understand that your catch this year was an average one 3—A. I think we got an average with the American fleet, as far as I have heard. Mr. Murray, of the custom-house at Canso, said that we had an average, or more than an average, with the American fleet. Q. Do you not think that you came rather late fishing to, and have come rather early from the bay ?—A.. I did not see any prospect of catching anything when I left, and so I thought I would come home. Something may yet be done though. Q. Is it not to your knowledge that the mackerel generally come in in abundance later than this date?—A. No ; not of late years. I have not, during the last 5 or 6 years, heard of much being done late in the sea- son in the bay. Q. What is the quality of the mackerel which you have taken this year 2—A. Well, they run rather poor; they are mostly 2s, and thin mackerel. They have not had much food; they are not fat. - Q. What proportion is number ones 3–A. I do not think one-quarter, if that. They, however, may be so this year, since mackerel are scarce. Q. What do you expect to get for number ones 3–A. About $16 or $18. I hear that they are worth that, but I do not know. Q. Have you not heard that No. 1 mess mackerel are bringing $22%— A. We have no mess mackerel; we did not mess any ; and we have very few fit for mess. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Did you fish with Seines or ‘hand-lines 3–A. We fished with hand- lines. Q. Were many American vessels fishing with Seines this year in the gulf º–A. I did not see any use them, though a number had seines. I have not seen a school in the bay. Q. When you spoke of menhaden-fishing, you spoke of a number of steamers being employed in it 3–A. Yes. Q. How far from the coast do these steamers take menhaden 7–A. They go sometimes 8 or 10 miles off, and sometimes inside of the islands and among the islands. Q. Do they take menhaden with purse-Seines 3–A. Yes. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Do you generally seine for mackerel when they school %–A. Yes. Q. Do you do so at any other time"—A. No. No. 41. ELVARADO GRAY, seaman and fisherman, of Brooksville, Me., was called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn, and examined. - By Mr. Foster: Question. You are a skipper of a Gloucester vessel ?—Answer. Yes. Q. What is the name of your vessel ?—A. Plymouth Rock. Q. How old are you ?—A. Twenty-eight. º AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2419 Q. How many years have you been skipper ?—A. Eight years, or 9 seasons. I have been skipper since I was 19. Q. Since you have been skipper you have been engaged in the Bank cod fishery 3—A. Yes. Q. Did you ever make mackerel trips in the bay ?—A. Yes. Q. How many?—A. Four. - Q. During what years?—A. In 1866 I was there for two trips. Q. You were then very young 2—A. Yes. I was not master at the time. Q. What was the name of the schooner you were in that year 7—A. The Reunion. Q. What was her captain's name 2—A. Harvey Conroy. Q. Did you take the first trip home to Gloucester that year?—A. Yes. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you get in the bay that year 2 —A. About 600 barrels. Q. You have no means of telling the number accurately?—A. No ; I could not say for a certainty. , - Q. Being a boy you did not have an interest in this matter like a skipper ?—A. That is very near the number—600 barrels. It is not it to a pound, but it is near enough. Q. Where were they caught 2—A. The biggest part was taken on IBanks Bradley and Orphan. Q. Were any of them caught within the 3-mile limit 3–A. I do not remember of heaving to within three miles of land that year. Q. When were you next in the gulf º–A. I would not say for certain but I think it was in the fall of 1870. Q. What was the name of your schooner that year 7—A. Henry L. Phillips. Q. Were you skipper ?—A. Yes. Q. How long were you in the gulf?—A. We got in there sometime about the middle of September, I think, and were there till sometime in October. Q. What did you catch 3—A. Something like 60 barrels. Q. What had you been doing during the previous part of the year 3– A. Banking, on the Grand Banks. Q. Where did you get these 60 barrels 7–A. Scattered all over the bay. There were no fish in the bay that year. Q. When were you again in the bay ?—A. In 1872 I think on a fall trip. Q. What was your schooner's name 2—A. George Clark. I was captain. w - Q. How many barrels did you take 3—A. 70, I think. . Q. Where did you take them 7–A. The bigger part we got at the Magdalen Islands and the rest scattered through the bay. - Q. When were you next there ?—A. In 1873, in the George Clark, on a fall trip. Q. What did you catch 3—A. 90 barrels, I think. We caught the bigger part of them at the Magdalen Islands, and the rest scattered through the bay. While I was in the bay I will say that we never got a barrel of mackerel within three miles of land. Q. The first year, when you made two trips, you were there for the Season 3–A. Yes. * - Q. And the last three years you made fall trips ?—A. Yes. Q. After you had been cod-fishing elsewhere?—A. Yes. 2420 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What have you done since 1873%—A. In 1874 and 1875 I was on Our COaSt. Q. And what have you been doing in 1876 and 1877 ?—A. Banking. Q. Where 7–A. At the Grand and Western Banks. Q. What is the name of the vessel of which you are skipper now 7– A. The Plymouth Rock. - : Q. You were in the same vessel last year?—A. No, I was then in the schooner Knight Templar. Q. How have you provided yourself with bait for Bank fishing last year and this year 2—A. I took fresh bait from Gloucester this season in the spring. My first trip was made to Western Bank; I also used fresh bait last year. - Q. What did you take for bait 2–A. Frozen herring, from Gloucester. Q. Did you obtain any other bait 3–A. Yes, we went to St. Andrew's Bay, on the American side, and baited the second time. Q. Where is that ?—A. About Eastport. Q. What bait did you get there ?—A. Fresh herring. Q. What did you do after you made your trip to the Western Bank 7– A. We went to Newfoundland direct from Gloucester then. Q. You did not provide yourself with bait at home 2—A. No, we went to Fortune Bay and bought herring, putting them in ice. Q. How often have you been to Newfoundland to buy bait this year?— A. Four times. Have you ever caught any herring there 7–A. No. . Or caplin 3–A. No. . Have you ever obtained either save by purchase?—A. No. Did you ever get squid there 3—A. Yes. * How %—A. We bought them. . Has there been any squid taken on your vessel ?—A. Yes, when Banking. Q. Under what circumstances 7–A. It is like this: when we go to New- foundland and bait is plentiful it pays us better to buy it, and then go on our trip, than to try and catch it ourselves, thus losing time, and when squid are scarce, we catch a few, and help to make up what we want so as to save time; that is our only object in catching them ourselves. Q. Are your men at leisure to fish for squid 2–A. No. *. Q. What do they do at this time 2—A. They have water to fill in, and ice to get; and as soon as the bait comes alongside, we have to use the men to hoist it on board. Q. When do your men ever catch bait 2–A. At nights. Q. How many squid in all do you suppose your vessels ever jigged or took 3–A. At the outside, 20 barrels in 2 Seasons—last year and this year. Q. How long does it take you to go in from the Banks to Newfound- land, obtain bait and return to your fishing grounds?—A. A fair aver, age time would be about a week. Q. What is the longest time 2—A. Nine days, to my knowledge. Q. And the shortest ?—A. Five days, I think. Q. What did your bait cost in Newfoundland this year 7–A. The Whole thing, port charges and all cost me about $400 on the last trip. Q. Did you have these bills, I now hand you, to pay?—A. Yes. Q. What are they for ?—A. This one, $4,80, was for water rates. I cannot tell you what it is for, I am sure. We have to pay them whether We fill in with water or not. It is a government bill. It rates 5 cents a ton. Q. What is the next for 7—A. Light dues; it amounts to $23.04. : AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 24.21 Q. How much is that a ton ?—A. 24 cents, on 96 tons. * Q. Pass right on to the next.—A. Well, the next is a harbor master’s bill—for fees. Q. What is it for 7—A. I do not know unless it is for the trouble of anchoring in the harbor. It is a bill we have to pay in St. John’s every time we anchor, and go out and in ; it amounts to $2. Q. Pass right along to the next.—A. The next bill is for anchoring and clearing and so on. Q. How much is it 7–A. I do not see any amount here. I do not know what it is. I do not know but what it is included in the water rate. It is a government concern. Q. It is not carried out 7–A. No. Q. I do not see any pilotage charge; how does that happen 7–A. Well, the trouble there is, when they speak us, and they are sure to do that, because they lie right in the mouth of the harbor, and you cannot go in by them without they speak you—for they are right in the door- yard—you are obliged to pay full pilotage whether you take them or not ; and so we took one, of course. Q. Is there a pilotage bill there 3—A. No. Q. How does that happen ?—A. We had a pilot, but he took us in and ran us on Cod Rock, and so I did not pay him anything. I told him if he would pay me the damage done my vessel I would pay pilotage fees, and so as he did not pay for the damage done the vessel, I did not pay pilotage—hence I have not got any bill. Q. Otherwise you would have paid pilotage fees 3–A. Exactly so. Q. The whole bills of the trip amounted to $400?—A. Yes; port charges and all. - Q. What do you think as to the difference between fresh and salt bait 2—A. Well, I think we would be just as well off if we had nothing to do with fresh bait; but in order to get a share of the fish now, I think that we have got to have fresh bait. But if all used salt bait, We could do just as well. We always used to get good trips with salt bait and Shack before fresh bait was introduced. Q. What was then used for salt bait 2—A. Clams, and porgies, and herring and Squid sometimes. Q. Did you use to obtain squid on the Banks 3–A. Yes. Q. Do you do so now %–A. They are scattered and not so plentiful there as they used to be. Q. Is the Squid a fish whose presence can be regularly depended on, or is its presence uncertain and migratory 2—A. Well, there are places Where you are Sure to get them on the Newfoundland coast. Q. What about Squid on the American coast 3–A. I know they are found there. Q. Whereabouts 3–A. I have seen them around the coast of Maine. Q. Are they found south of Cape Cod 2–A. Yes. They come there Sometimes in May, and are caught in weirs, &c. Q. In great abundance 3–A. I think not, but I do not know much about this. Q. What proportion of the business of Gloucester is engaged in the cod fishery and What proportion in the mackerel fishery, as far as you are able to judge 3—A. I should say that two-thirds are engaged in the Bank fishery and one-third in the mackerel and herring fisheries. Q. What proportion does the herring bear, compared with the mack- erel fishery 3–A. One-half, I should think. Q. Do they catch or buy herring”—A. So far as my knowledge goes, 2422 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. they have always bought herring. I have never been on a herring trip, but I understand that this is the case. i Q. When you speak of one-sixth of the business of Gloucester being engaged in the mackerel fishery, do you refer to the Gulf of St. Law- rence mackerel fishery 3–A. I should say that is for the Whole thing. Q. Do you know about the mackerel fishery on the coast of the United States ?—A. I did not think about it; for the last two or three years most of the mackerel have been caught on our own coast. You all know that as well as I do. Q. You said that your average time spent in getting bait was 7 days?— A. About a Week. By Mr. Weatherbe: Q. You fished in the Reunion in 1866?—A. Yes. Q. That is the first time you went fishing?—A. O, no; but that is the first time I was in the bay. I have fished since 1861, when I was 11 years old. Q. Where did you then fish 7–A. On the Grand Banks. Q. You did very well in the bay in 1866?—A. Yes. Q. Why did you not stick to the Reunion ?—A. When it comes fall we make a change. Our mackerel season is up in the fall. I went two trips to the bay in her. By Mr. Foster: Q. Do you know anything about the herring business at Grand Ma- nan 7–A. Yes; but very little. Q. Have you been there 3—A. Yes. Q. When 3–A. Last spring and this year; but I did not take any bait there. I took bait, however, last season at Bliss Island. Q. Do you know of any catch of herrings being made by Americans in that vicinity ?—A. No ; there has never been one to my knowledge. By Mr. Weatherbe: Q. Do you know where the Reunion went in 1867 ?—A. No; she had then changed masters. * Q. Who was she owned by ?—A. William Henry Steele, then, I think. Q. Of Gloucester?—A. Yes. Q. Is it the custom of Gloucester fishermen to remain in the employ of the same owners?—A. No ; they change about. Q. Constantly 3—A. Yes. Q. The rule is to change about 3—A. I do not know about that, but they do so. Q. What is the usual practice”—A. To make changes. Q. Do they remain with the same owners year after year 7—A. No. Q. Do you know what the Reunion caught in 1867 ?—A. No. Q. Did you then make any inquiries about her ?—A. No. Q. Do you not hear what catches vessels make 3–A. We do pretty well when we attend to our own business. Q. You are not able to state the catches of other vessels?—A. No. Q. Or to give any information in this respect save for your own ves- sel ?—A. No. Q. Most of the fishermen would be likely to know only what their own vessels did 3–A. They will do pretty well if they know that. Q. Some fishermen, frequent certain places in the bay and others other places?—A. Yes. - Q. And some always go to the Magdalen Islands?—A. Yes; that IS SO. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2423 Q. And others to the bend of the island 7—A. Yes. Q. Then you would not be able to tell what others did Ž–A. No. Q. Have you ever met Charles W. Dunn, a fisherman, who has fre- Quently fished in American vessels 7–A. I have met a man named Peter Dunn, but I do not know any Charles Dunn. Q. He deposes: That in 1870, I was about two months and a half fishing in the gulf, in the Reunion, during which time we got four hundred and thirty barrels of mackerel. She was sev- enty-four tons and carried fifteen hands. ’8, A. Yes; but I thought she was sold out in California before that time. Q. You do not remember her fishing that year 2—A. No ; I know nothing about it at all. Q. He continues: That in 1871, I was in the Rambler for eight weeks, fishing in the gulf. We took out two hundred and eighty barrels of mackerel. We came into the gulf late that Season. She was sixty-three tons, and that time carried thirteen hands. That fully three-quarters of the fish taken in these schooners were taken close to the shore, or within three miles along this island, Miscou, Bay Chaleur, the Magdalens, and other places on the British coasts. Taking the season through, the inshore fishing is the best. I believe that it would not be at all worth while to fit out for this gulf if the vessels were not allowed to fish inshore. Q. Had you a license when in the bay ?—A. No. Q. You know nothing about the cutters?—A. Yes; when I was there, in 1872, there were cutters in the bay. There were plenty of cutters, but no fish. i Q. When there were plenty of cutters in the bay there were no fish for Americans ?—A. Yes; that is probable; but— Q. Do you want to explain that any further ?—A. Just so ; but the Nova Scotian vessels had the same trouble, too. Q. Were they kept out 3—A. The Nova Scotian vessels did not do any better than our own vessels. That is between you and me. * We want to know about it.—A. That is the idea, and the true thing. Q. That is just what we want to come at and ascertain.-A. Yes; go OI). Q. If you have any information to give about it. Were they kept out Of the 3-mile limit 2–A. No. Q. Were you?—A. Yes; we were. Q. Constantly º–A. But there were no fish inshore or offshore. Q. Were you kept constantly outside of the 3-mile limit 3–A. Well, no ; I could not say that we were constantly, because the cutters would not be in sight all the time, of course. 1sº What vessel, were you in then 3–A. The George Clark; year 2. Q. When the cutters were out of sight, would you steal inside of the 3-mile limit 2–A. No ; we would not. Q. You did not try to go in 3–A. No. Q. You never fished inside of the 3-mile limit?—A. No. Q. You never hove to inside of the three-mile limit?—A. No ; I do not think that I ever did so in my life. Of course if there had been any fish inshore or any inducement for us to go in we would have done so. Q. And you never tried inshore in your life 3–A. I never did ; no. Q. You never heard of three-quarters of the fish being taken within the three-mile limit, as mentioned in C. W. Dunn's deposition ?—A. Yes; I have heard tell of vessels fishing inshore. Q. And making large catches?—A. No ; I never heard that. 2424. AWARD OF THE FISELERY COMMISSION. Q. If you had you would have gone in and tried ?–A. I think it is likely I would if I knew that there were plenty of fish inshore. Q. If you had ever heard evidence like that I mentioned, you would have gone in and given the inshore fishery a trial 3–A. Well, I know a little more about that matter than the man who made that statement. Q. Would you have done so or not ?—A. Well, of course if there were fish inshore and we knew it and had a chance to catch them. We proba- bly would do so. Q. If you heard a hundred men swear what I have mentioned, would you do so 3–A. If I heard men swear to a lie and I knew it, that Would be no temptation to me. Q. But you would certainly be open to conviction ?—A. O, yes. Q. If a hundred men so swore, would you be induced to give it a trial?— A. That would depend on circumstances. Q. If you had a license, how much persuasion would have induced you to give the inshore fishery one trial?—A. If I was going to fish in- shore, I would have gone the right way about it and obtained a license. Q. Do you not think you are a little prejudiced about this matter 3– A. No. Q. What prejudice have you against those shores of ours ?—A. None. Q. And you never once tried inshore ?—A. No, not in the bay. Q. So of course you cannot speak about this fishery from your own knowledge; you must have some sort of prejudice in this regard 3–A. What is the use of our going to try for fish where we know there are no fish. Q. Precisely, but you did not know; how did you find out 2—A. Were not the boats fishing right along as we went along the shore, and We could see whether they were getting fish or not. The boats were strung all around the shore. Q. Now you are telling us something.—A. Yes; I am glad of it. Q. How many thousand boats fished inside the three-mile limit around Prince Edward Island 7–A. I do not know, but I know that a great many boats fished around the coast. Q. How much did these boats catch, on the average %–A. I do not know. Q. Did you ever try to ascertain 3–A. No. Q. Did you ever make inquiries respecting this matter 2—A. No. Q. Have you any idea respecting it 3–A. No. Q. Do you know from personal observation what they caught 7–A. No. O Q. And yet you never tried inshore ?—A. Not within the three-mile limit. Q. The cutters never gave you any trouble?—A. No ; their men only boarded us and told us that we were not allowed to fish within three miles of the shore. | Q. And you obeyed the order 2—A. Yes. Q. How far did you ever go inshore to fish 7–A. Well, probably within five or six miles of land. Q. Have you any preference as to fishing six miles off, over four miles off 2–A. Well, of course there is no way for us to tell the exact distance. Q. Have you any such preference %—A. Of course not. Q. Is five miles off any better than four and a half miles for fishing purposes?—A. That does not amount to anything with me. We fish were we find fish. We catch them five miles offshore and ten miles off When the fish are there. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 24.25 Q. If the fish were three and a half miles off shore, you would have no objection to catch them there ?—A. Not in the least. Q. Have you any choice as to distance %–A. No. Q. You think that five miles off is better than three and a half miles for fishing 2—A. It does not make any odds. Q. You think there is no difference between them 2–A. It does not make any odds where we find the fish. Q. Do you think 5 miles off is a better distance to fish at than three and a half miles, as a usual thing %–A. I could not say. Q. Or better than 6, 7, or 8 miles off?—A. I could not say. g Q. Or 10 miles off 2–A. I do not know any limit to it; there is none, as far as I can see. Q. You don’t know of there being any difference between three and a half miles and 15 miles off for fishing 2—A. No, we catch the fish out of sight of land sometimes, on Banks Orphan and Bradley. Q. And sometimes you make bad voyages there ?—A. The best Voy- age I ever made was out of sight of land. Q. We have had a good many bad years and failures through fishing out of sight of land; we have heard of men failing year after year there, and yet they never tried to fish inshore, although they heard that there was good fishing inshore ?—A. Well, I do not think it. Q. Do you not think that you are mistaken in A. O, no. Q. What about 3–A. The fishing. Q. What about the fishing 2—A. Well, what you were speaking about —the limit. Q. You said you had no choice about the limit, and that three and a half miles offshore was as good for fishing as 15 miles off—A. Yes; I don’t see any difference. - Q. But this is what I was going to observe : you might be mistaken about it ; I am quite sure that there is a mistake ; you said you had done better outside the three-mile limit than—what ?—A. Yes. When I was in the bay in 1866, and that was the only year I did anything at all in the bay. % Q. You did better outside than what ?—A. In 1866 we caught all the mackerel I ever saw taken in the bay to amount to anything, and they were got offshore. - Q. You were in the bay in 1870, 1872, and 1873 &–A. We were there in 1872 and 1873. Q. In 1870 you were in the Henry L. Phillips as skipper ?—A. Then I was there in 1870 and 1872. Q. And 1873 also, for you were four years in the bay ?—Well, all right. Q. Besides 1866. Is that not correct 7–A. Yes. Then I was five trips in the bay instead of four. Q. And in 1870 you only caught 60 barrels 3–A.. I think so. Q. And only 70 barrels in 1872 %—A. I think so. Q. And Only 90 barrels in 1873%—A. Yes. Q. It was an utter failure?—A. Pretty much so. That was in the fall, after we got home from the Banks. Q. That was a failure ?–A. Yes. t Q. Can you give us any earthly reason why you did not try inshore after 1870 ?—A. It was because there were no fish inshore. * Q. I thought you had done well enough and better outside 3—A. You misunderstood me this time. Q. Then you do not say that the fishing was better outside 3–A. 2426 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. There was no fishing in the bay in those years that amounted to any- thing inside or outside. Q. But you told us you did not know anything about anybody’s Catches except your own 3–A. Yes. º Q. And you did not ask the men in the boats or make the slightest inquiry about what was caught inshore?—A. How do you know % Q. You told us you made no inquiries of what the boats did.—A. Ex- cuse me, I do not think I told you any such thing. You asked me how I knew, and I told you I could see the boats fishing around the shore. Q. I asked you if from personal observation you could tell what they caught, and you said you had enough to mind your own business. Have you made any mistake? Explain.—A. All I came here for was to give a fair account of what I know about the fisheries—and if you understood it as I do you would understand what I mean—and that is what I am doing. I have no prejudice in this matter. When we were in the bay for mackerel it was easy enough for us to find out whether there were any mackerel inshore or offshore. Plenty of vessels and boats were trying, and if there were no mackerel along the coast it is not likely that without any inducement we would make ourselves liable for seizure. It is easy enough to discover whether the fish are inshore or not by running along it and looking at the boats. We can tell Whether a man is catching fish or not by looking at him without asking a question; and by running along the coast and looking at the boats we can see for ourselves. - Q. Did you ever make any inquiries as to the catch of the boats during the season 3–A. No. * Q. Did you make any inquiries whatever of the boatmen with re- spect to the boat-fisheries 7–A. Well, I have talked the matter over ; while in the harbor I have seen men whom I have asked if any of the boats were doing anything, or had done anything round the shore, and the like of that, you know. Q. In which harbor did you do this?—A. Well, in Port Hood. Q. Whom did you ask?—A. Now, you have got me. I don’t know one boat-fisherman from another. Q. How often did you so inquire in Port Hood, or anywhere else?— A. Perhaps I might have inquired once or twice, or it might have been half a dozen times, I could not say which. Q. Did you inquire in Port Hood as to what the average catch of the boats was, or how they had done during the season 7—A. No ; I never asked, save as to whether they had done anything along the shore. Q. During the season 3–A. No ; but at that time—that day or that week. I would ask if they had been doing anything inshore. Q. That was after their fishing was over. You were not there till the fall ?—A. Yes. Q. Then I suppose you found out that their fishery was over for the Season 3—A. Do they not get mackerel on shore in the fall as well as in the summer ? Q. What did you find out from them 2–A. Well, the answer I got from them was that the boats were doing nothing. Q. They were not then fishing at all ?—A. Well, they were trying, it See Iſ S. - Q. What is the fishing season for the boats?—A. Well, I do not think that it belongs to me to answer that question. Q. How often did you find out that the boats were doing nothing, and during what months º–A. Well, it was, say, in October that I made Such inquiry. ! AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2427 Q. Were you on your way home in October 2—A. No. Q. Had you then just come into the bay ?—A. I came in Some time in September. Q. How long did you wait there 2–A. We generally left the bay about the middle of October. We used to do so. Q. At what time in October did you make such inquiries 7–A. Per- haps the first or perhaps the last of September. Q. And you found out that the boats were doing nothing 2—A. They Said they were not. Q. Then you did not try there 4–A. No, not in there. Q. Was that the reason why you did not try in there?—A. Partly; that might have been partly the reason. Q. Did you ask what the boats had done, or usually did 3–A. No. Q. You then only made inquiry as to what the boat-fishers were doing that day or that week, as the case might be 2–A. Yes. Q. How did you learn that the shore fisheries were useless and worth- less %–A. From what we could hear. Q. What did you hear?—A. What you are talking about don’t amount to anything as I can see. If we were in Port Hood Harbor and wanted to know whether there was any fishing round about there or not, we would see other skippers, &c., and find out in a very short time whether they had done anything off shore or on, and if there were no fish there we would go to what we considered the most likely place at which we could get them. Q. I understood you to say you did not make inquiries of any other vessels, and that to mind your own business was as much as you could do. Then you did inquire what other vessels had caught 3—A. Yes; naturally so. Q. And did you find out what they caught 3–A. No ; I do not think it. By Mr. Whiteway: Q. Are you part owner of the vessel of which you are now captain?— A. No. Were you part owner of the Knight Templar 3–A. No. You fished on the Grand Banks from 1861 to 1866 %–A. Yes. You Were a hand then 3–A. Yes. i You have been on the Grand Banks during the last two years 7– A. Yes. Q. And this is the extent of your experience in that fishing 2—A. Yes. Q. How many men are on board of your present vessel ?—A. Four- teen, all told. - - Q. In the spring, when the vessel is fitted out, do each of these men get a supply of articles to leave with their families—an advance %–A. I think so. I think that the firms supply them with outfits. Q. The owners of the vessel supply them with a sufficiency for their families during their absence 2—A. I think so, but I am not sure about it. I know that as a general thing the families draw on the men. Q. During their absence, their wives or families get what they re- Quire 7–A. Anything in reason, of course. I understand so. Q. Is the ordinary cash price or a large profit charged for these arti- cles 3–A. I have never been a member of such a firm ; but I think they get enough out of the business to run it of course—a fair profit. Q. The firms do not charge the ordinary cash price in this rela- tion ?—A. Well, they ought not to ; they are not going to get cash ; I think they make enough to get a living out of the business. Q. You know that they do charge a long profit º–A. No ; I do not Q. Q. Q. Q. 2428 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. think that they do; but I think that they charge profit enough to make themselves whole, taking one year with another. t Q. Is their percentage 30 or 40 per cent. above the cash price 7–A. It is 20 or 25 per cent., I think, over and above it. Q. Is not a greater price than the ordinary cash price charged for the articles required for the fitting out of a vessel ?—A. No, I do not think SO. Q. Do.you know whether this is so or not ?—A.. I have been part owner of 3 vessels, and for outfits from spring to the fall we expected to pay probably 15 per cent. over and above the cash price in consideration for the delay. - Q. Then the supplier charges 15 per cent. over and above the cash price for articles supplied ?–A. Yes; something like that ; he has got to have it for the use of his money; such difference is 15 or 20 per cent., or somewhere along there; I could not say exactly what it is. Q. What would it cost to pack and cure a barrel of mackerel for market 2—A.. I am not prepared to answer that question. Q. Would $1 pay all such expenses?—A. I think not; the barrel it- Self is worth somewhere about a dollar; I think they charge $2 for packing a barrel of mackerel—for barrel and all. Q. That leaves a handsome profit to the packer; something like 50 or 60 cents 7–A. Yes, about that. Q. What does it cost to cure a quintal of Bank codfish 7–A. I could not state such cost correctly; we bring our fish in cured in quintals, and Weigh them from the hatch and sell them. Q. To the owners of the vessels?—A. Sometimes, and sometimes to Others. - Q. But, as a general thing, the owner of the vessel takes the voyage as Soon as the vessel arrives 3–A. Yes. Q. The fish is weighed out, and you are credited with a certain price for them 3–A. Yes. Q. What does it cost to cure for market dried codfish 2—A. I think that at Beverly thy charge 25 cents a quintal for making the fish after it comes from the hatch. By Mr. Foster: Q. Salt included ?–A. They do not use any salt there; but in Glou- cester they do. By Mr. Whiteway: Q. Is there any other expense ?—A. Yes, if the fish are boxed up for market. Q. Is there not an arrangement made among the vessel-owners and suppliers for the Bank fishery as to the price which they will credit the fishermen for their fish 7–A. I think so. Q. So that immediately after a vessel comes in with a cargo the price to be credited is known from such previous arrangement among the merchants?—A. Yes. Af Q. What is the difference between the prices allowed by the mer- chants and the market-price for dried codfish 3–A. I cannot say. Q. Does not the owner of the vessel make a profit of something like $1 a quintal upon the fish when cured and ready for market 2—A. I think they calculate to make seventy-five cents or a dollar; but they do not always obtain it. Q. To what place did you go from Gloucester last year in the Knight Templar 7—A. To the Western Bank first. Q. Had you fresh bait 3–A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION, 2.429 Q. Did you take it from Gloucester ?—A. No. Q. Where did you get it'—A. At Bliss Island, N. B. Q. Did you go into any Dominion or Newfoundland ports for bait last year 7–A. Yes. Q. Where did you go?—A. Into Hermitage Bay, Newfoundland. Q. When were you there ?—A. The first of May. - Q. Was that after you had used up the bait you had taken from Bliss Island 2–A. Yes; I took that bait to Western Bank, and afterwards Went to Hermitage Bay and obtained herring. Q. And you then proceeded to the Grand Bank 7–A. Yes. Q. Did you buy your bait there ?—A. Yes. Q. Did you go at any other time last year to Newfoundland ports for bait 2—A. Yes. Q. When 7–A. I was at St. John's about the 1st of August, on my second trip. - Q. You had been in the mean time to Gloucester 7—A. We went to Gloucester on the 19th of June with our first trip. Q. What did you take on your first voyage %–A. 169,000 pounds. Q. And you proceeded direct from Gloucester to St. John’s 7–A. We went to Canso; we could not get bait there, and then we went to St. Pierre Island. I bought salt bait there and went on the Bank with it, reaching the Bank on the 21st of July. Q. You afterward went for bait to the Newfoundland coast 3–A. Yes. Q. When did you leave the Bank to do so 7–A. I was on the Bank 10 days, leaving it about the 2d of August. I arrived in Newfoundland Somewhere about the 3d or 4th of August. Q. Is your memory distinct regarding the days º–A. Very nearly. Q. You got bait in St. John's and then returned to the Bank º–A. No. I went in there to get ice and money. Q. Money—for what purpose 7–A. To buy bait and ice. Q. Did you require to get water there ?—A. No. We might at one time get ice in St. John's, and not bait, going to some other port for Squid. & Q. Did you not then go to some other port for water and other arti- cles 3–A. When we used to go on long trips we took water enough for them, but now that we calculate to go in for fresh bait we do not take as much water with us, but fill up when we go in. Q. You say your port charges and all at St. John’s amounted to $400%—A. Yes, about that, for my last trip. Q. Have you any account of it 3–A. Not here, but I could produce it. Q. You have given us items, amounting to $29.84%—A. That is for port charges alone. I bought bait and ice besides. Nº. Were not several sums advanced to the crew in St. John's 3–A. N O. Q. Do you never so advance money in port 2—A. Sometimes we let them have a little money. Q. Does not a great portion of this $400 consist of advances made to the crew 7–A. No ; it consists of what was paid for port-charges, bait, and ice. Our other expenses are not ingluded in it. We do other trading around the coast. Q. What other trading 7–A. Suppose we want to buy anything for the vessel, such as a barrel of flour, we do so; but such expenses are not included in the $400. Q. What articles did you buy there on this occasion ?—A. I could not mention them all. I let the crew this year have a little money, and I bought some things myself, clothing, &c. g 2430 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Can you give us the particulars as to what you bought for the ves- sel ?–A. I bought some rigging, some baskets for the handling of bait, and so on. I suppose you do not expect me to mention every article in detail. We never go in without spending some money. Q. What did you pay for bait on this occasion out of this $400?—A. I could not tell you exactly, because we have to pay different prices for it. We may get bait for $12 at one time, and at another time it may cost us $100. Q. Have you ever paid $100 for bait on one trip 7–A. I think I have for bait and ice, and I do not know but more. Q. What is the highest amount which you ever paid for bait alone on one trip 3–A. Sixty-eight dollars, I think, for squid. - Q. And what is the lowest amount 7–A. Twelve dollars and fifty cents for caplin. - Q. What do you pay for ice 7–A. Different prices; they asked us $12 a ton this year. - Q. How many tons of ice do you take on one trip 3–A. Six. Q. How much do you pay for ice on a trip"—A. Twelve dollars a ton, in an ice country too. Q. When did you pay this?—A. This year, to a Dutchman there. I don’t know his name. It was Wamburgh, or what's his name, that keeps a confectionery shop 3 Q. Lunburgh 3—A. Yes. Q. Do you mean to swear that you paid $12 a ton for ice º–A. Yes. Q. How many tons did you get on this trip this year 3–A. Five tons, I think. Q. Are you clear about this?—A. Yes; I took ice there last year. Q. That is for one baiting 7–A. Yes. Q. That makes $60 for ice, and, with $68 for bait, this makes $128; and adding to this sum $29.84, we have $157 for ice, bait, and port- charges. How is the difference between this amount and $400 made up 3–A. We baited four times. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Does this $400 cover more than one trip 3–A. It covers the four baitings. This was for my last voyage. By Mr. Whiteway : Q. Between what dates did you bait 2–A. Between the 1st of June and the last of August. Q. You went in four times to St. John’s 7–A. No. Q. But in to the coast 7–A. Yes. Q. If you had not got that bait at Newfoundland, you must have ob- tained it somewhere 7–A. We might have taken salt bait. Q. It would have cost more than fresh bait, would it not ?—A. I could not say as to that. * Q. What do you pay per barrel for salt bait 7–A. At Gloucester it costs, I guess, $4 a barrel. -- Q. And herrings in Newfoundland cost $1 a barrel ?–A. Yes. Q. Would you require to buy ice, &c., in Gloucester 2—A. Yes. Q. And you would have to go a considerably greater distance from the Banks to Gloucester for these articles than to Newfoundland 3–A. Yes. Q. Then the cost of getting bait in Newfoundland is considerably less than it would be in Gloucester º–A. I think not. | Q. How is that ?—A. If we are going to take bait from Gloucester we would take probably 10 or 12 or 15 barrels, and the rest we would AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2431 pick up on the Banks. If we were going to have salt bait, we would catch birds and porpoises, and get shack and mix it with them, and that Would do us for the season. w Q. Does your getting fresh bait prevent you getting shack on the Banks?—A. Well, we consider fresh bait to be better than salt bait and Shack. We have ice-houses and all that kind of thing, and we do not Spend any time in looking after shack or in picking it up. Q. It must take you some time to get it on the Banks 3–A. Yes, of Course ; but when we have fresh bait we do not occupy any time in get- ting that at all. We do not then bother with it. Q. What have you on your vessel in the harbor now %–A. About 10,000 pounds of codfish, caught within a fortnight. Q. Where?—A. Just east of what is called Green Island, near Port- land. Q. You have not been in Newfoundland for bait for this trip?—A. No. Q. Did you go there while on your former voyage this year !—A. Yes; four times. Q. How many times did you go to Newfoundland for bait last year?— A. Three times. Q. What was the longest time between the time you left the Banks till you returned to them, that you have ever consumed in obtaining bait there 7–A. Nine days. Q. And five days is the shortest time you ever so occupied ?—A. Yes. Q. Have you ever observed the lantz on the Banks?—A. Yes. Q. During what months?—A. It is found there during all the months. I think it comes there in the last of June, and it is to be seen there in July and August—different schools are met with ; the spring School is large and the August school small. - Q. Have you ever observed it there afterward?—A.. I think it is there in September, and it is found there in October; I have seen them there in the last of the fall. Q. Are the caplin found there?—A. Yes, about the Virgin Rocks and the Southern part of the Grand Banks; I have seen them there about the first of July and the last of June. - Q. Have you noticed how long they continue on the Banks 7–A. I think they stop there about a fortnight. - Q. In what depth of water have you there seen caplin?—A. In four Or five fathoms. Q. IS that the deepest water in which you have seen them there?—A. I have seen them in 40 fathoms; the codfish drive them right on to the Surface of the water. Q. You have always fished with trawls?—A. I have also fished with hand-lines; I have fished with trawls during the last two years. We used hand-lines altogether on my first voyage. * Q. Are you in the habit of taking up much seaweed on your trawls 3– A. No ; I do not know anything about that. Q. You have not seen this happen?—A. No. Q. Do you know as a matter of fact that seaweed 1s often brought up On the Banks?—A. I never knew of it. - Q. Have you taken the trouble at any time to examine the stomachs of Codfish 7–A. Yes. - Q. And have you found any small shell-fish in their stomachs 2–Yes, plenty of them. Q. Does that occur at all times during the fishing season 2—A. Yes, ImOre Or less. Q: What is the food which you have principally found in their stom- 2432 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. achs on the Banks 7–A. Caplin and lantz, and what we call Bank Clams and Crabs. - Q. Have you fished for cod on Western Banks, Grand Banks, and George's Bank?—A. Yes. Q. Have you observed any difference between the cod on these several Banks?—A. Yes. Q. Can you describe it 3–A. Yes. The Western Bank cod are not nearly so large as the Grand Bank cod; there is more of a black nape on the former than on the latter, and the former are not so well fed, and they are very watery and slim. The Grand Bank cod are the largest fish, and they resemble each other more as to quality. They are large, white naped, and well fed—better fed than the Western Bank cod. The latter are small and black, and they are thinner than the others. By Mr. Foster: & Q. What do you mean by black naped ?—A. The nape is the belly part—it is a little thin skin over the belly of the fish. Q. Your family does not have to get advances in your business?—A. No, and I am not posted much in that line. No. 42. FRIDAY, October 5, 1877. The Conference met. ROBERT H. HuDBERT, fisherman, of Gloucester, was called, on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster: Question. How old are you ?—Answer. Thirty-five. Q. Where were you born ?—A. In Yarmouth, Nova Scotia. Q. You have been a fisherman and captain of fishing and trading ves- sels for some years 7–A. Yes. Q. When did you first fish for mackerel in the Gulf of Saint Law- rence”—A. In 1861, I think. Q. In what vessel were you then 7–A. The Roger Williams. Q. What was the name of her captain 3–A. Lane. Q. How many fish did you take 3–A. Two hundred and sixty barrels, I believe, but I would not be certain. % Q. Have you any means of refreshing your memory as to dates and Catches º–A. No. - Q. You are now pilot on the Speedwell ?—A. Yes. Q. Where did you catch your fish the first year you were in the gulf?— A. Principally at the Magdalen Islands. The last we caught were i. near Fisherman’s Bank, between Cape George and Prince Edward sland. Q. Were any portion taken within 3 miles of the shore ?–A.. I could not say ; but probably not more than one-eighth were so caught, as I have found this to be the case on different trips made since. Q. What were you doing from 1862 to 1865?–A. I was engaged in different kinds of fishing, but mostly in cod-fishing. I sometimes fished for mackerel on our own coast. Q. When did you make your second mackerel trip to the gulf º–A. I Cannot be certain as to the year, because it was some time afterwards. Q. What was the name of your vessel ?—A. The Pocumtuc, I think. Q. Who was her captain º–A. George H. Hurlbert, my brother. Q. You cannot fix that year accurately 7—A. No. Q. What was your catch 3–A. About 180 barrels. AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 2433 Q. Where were they taken 2–A. At the Magdalen Islands principally. Some were caught near Margaree Island, Cape Breton. Q. How many were caught there ?—A. We only fished there one day, to the best of my recollection, and we got something in the neighbor- hood of 30 or 35 barrels. Q. Were any taken that year by you within three miles of the shore ?—A. A certain number of vessels fish around Prince Edward Island and the coast of Cape Breton at different places. Some fish near the Port Hood Islands, on the west coast of Cape Breton. Q. But where were these 180 barrels taken 3–A. At the Magdalen Islands principally. We staid there as long as we could, with regard to the weather. We left them somewhere near the middle of October; but I cannot remember the exact time. Q. Where did you then go 2–A. To Port Hood, for a harbor. Q. Were the mackerel you took near Margaree Island caught either within three miles of the island or the mainland 3–A. They were prob- ably taken within three miles of Margaree Island. Q. But not within three miles of the mainland 3–A, No. Q. Were they taken outside of that island 3–A. Yes. Q. When did you make your third trip to the Gulf of St. Lawrence 2– A. I cannot remember the year exactly ; but the next vessel in which I went there was the Aphrodite, Captain Calderwood. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you take 3—A. Two hundred and seventy. Q. Where were they taken 3–A. Principally between North Cape, Prince Edward Island, and Miscou Island, up the west shore. Q. Was any portion of them taken within three miles of the shore?— A. We did not fish much in any other part of the bay. There did not seem to be any fish at the Magdalen Islands that summer of any conse- Quence. The fish were scarce there that year, and we took the most part of our fish up in that part of the bay. We took none of any con- sequence anywhere else. Q. To what part of the bay do you particularly allude 3–A. To that between North Cape and Point Miscou. Q. Were they taken within three miles of the shore ?—A. I should not say that they were. Q. Can you give any reason why they were not ?—A. It is because you cannot raise a body of mackerel in such shoal water as is generally found three miles from the shore On that part of the coast. Q. What is the shoalest water in which you usually raise a school of mackerel ?—A. We cannot raise a school, to make it profitable to lay to and heave over bait, in short of 20 or 25 fathoms of water. Q. Is the water as deep as that along the shore between North Cape and Point Miscou within three miles of the shore ?—A. I think not. Q. Have you fished along the north shore of Prince Edward Island 7– A. Yes. - Q. You were only in the gulf for mackerel during three years 3–A. No ; I was there two years since that. Q. Did you fish along the bend of the island during the early years when you were in the bay ?—A. Yes; but very little; nothing of any Consequence. Q. How near the shore do you anchor when seeking a lee off the bend of the island 3–A. From 2 to 2% miles of the shore. Q. And then when you weigh anchor and try to fish again, do you begin to fish from the anchorage ground, or do you run out farther ?—A. 153 E. 2434 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. We then run off usually from 1 mile to 13 miles, and perhaps 2% miles before we try. Q. What is the nearest point to the land at which you have known fishing to be done off Prince Edward Island 3—A. From 3 to 5 and probably from 5 to 15 miles off. Q. Why is it that a vessel, in order to fish advantageously, must raise a considerable school of mackerel ?—A. You have to have a considera- ble body of fish alongside to make it profitable to heave bait over; bait costs considerable. Q. How much bait would you throw over usually during a day’s fish- ing 2—A. From 2 to 24 barrels. • Q. What does it cost per barrel ?—A. It varies in price at different * sometimes the price is as high as $8, and sometimes as low as $6. - Q. Can you fish even at the distance from the land you have men- tioned off the north coast of Prince Edward Island and the bend of the island when the wind is on shore ?—A. No. Q. Why not ?—A. Because the water is shoal, and the sea raises there very quickly and becomes rough, and of course as the wind in- creases the sea will naturally increase, and we have then to get out of there and go somewhere else. - Q. Is it a safe place to be in 2—A. No, not when the wind is on shore. Q. Is there any particular point from which the wind there chiefly blows 3—A. Not that I know of ; the wind varies there about the same as at any other part of the coast. Q. How long does it ordinarily take to run the whole length of the island 3–A. 11 hours, with a good breeze. Q. Were you fishing up in these waters at any time when the cutters were here ?—A. Yes, one year. Q. That was the year you did not fix, and your third one, I suppose? —A. No, it was since then. Q. Do you remember either during your first or third year's fishing here, going into Malpeque Habor and getting aground 3–A. Yes. Q. When was that ?—A. The year I was in the Aphrodite. We went ashore going into Malpeque Harbor in the night. Q. How did it happen 3–A. The night was dark and stormy. Q. What did you get ashore on ?—A. On the bar while going in. Q. Have you been in any of the other harbors in the bend of the island 7–A. I was in Cascumpegue Once. & Q. Were you in any others ?—A. No ; not on that side of the island. Q. Is it easy to enter either Cascumpeque or Malpeque Harbors with a light wind 3–A. No. Q. Can fishing-Vessels depend on getting into them and out of the way from the storm 3—A. No. Q. What, then, is the way of escape from a storm for fishing-vessels off the bend of the island 3–A. When you see a storm commence, you must either go one way or the other to get out of the bend of the island—either, around North Cape or down around East Point. The wind is generally so that you can fetch one way or the other. - Q. How quickly does a high wind get up there ?—A. It waries con- siderably; sometimes a squall rises, and it blows very heavily in a very short time—in a few minutes, in fact ; and sometimes the wind rises gradually. º Q. What do you say about the Magdalen Islands as a place for safe fishing?—A. This is a very good place for fishing, because we can make a lee with any Wind. AWARD OF TEIE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 2435 Q. For some years after your first three years you were not in the Gulf of St. Lawrence %–A. No. Q. When were you there again 3–A. In 1872. Q. In what vessel ?—A. The Hattie B. West; I was the skipper. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you take 3–A. Three hundred and seven. Q. How long were you taking them 3–A. We went into the bay Some time between the 1st and the 10th of August, and we left it on the 25th of October. - Q. Where were these fish taken 3–A. All at the Magdalen Islands. Q. When did you leave the Magdalen Islands 2—A. About the 20th or the 21st of October. Q. Where did you then go 3–A. To Georgetown, Prince Edward Island. Q. For what ?—A. We started to go to Port Hood, but when we got across to East Point, Prince Edward Island, the wind came from the southward with such force that we could not fetch Port Hood, and as the wind blew fresh, we went into Georgetown and there made prepara- tions to go home. Q. Did you afterward go to Port Hood 2–A. Yes. Q. Did you fish that year anywhere save at the Magdalen Islands 3– A. We tried one day from East Point"up the island probably twelve miles on the north side, with some fifty sail of vessels. Q. How far out were you ?—A. We tried all the way probably three to twelve miles Off shore. Q. With what success %–A. We could not find anything; none of uS got anything. - Q. This was in 1872?–A. Yes. Q. What were you doing in 1873%—A. I was then again in the bay. Q. In what vessel ?—A. The Joe Hooker. Q. Were you skipper ?—A. Yes. g Q. When did you go into the bay ?—A. Somewhere about the 10t of July; but I would not be certain. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you take that season 2—A. We sent home by a freighter from Canso, 2104 barrels; we then re- turned, and got back the day before the storm of 1873. Q. Did you send your fish home in a Sailing-Vessel or in a steamer ?— A. We shipped them in a sailing-vessel. Q. What did it cost to send them home 2—A. Seventy-five cents a barrel. Q. From what port did you send them 3–A. Port Hawkesbury. Q. When ?—A. The gale took place on the 13th, I think, and—but I can hardly remember the date, though I have it all down in some of my books, which I haven’t with me; it was somewhere about the 1st of August. Q. What did you do after that ?—A. We took 270 barrels. Q. Where did you catch your two fares of mackerel in 1873?—A. We caught our first trip on Bank Bradley and at the Magdalen Islands in the summer; and we took our second trip principally at the Magdalen Islands; we got some few at Prince Edward Island. Q. How many did you take at Prince Edward Island?—A. Probably one-eighth of the last fare, but no more. Q. Bow near the shore was that portion taken 3–A. They were caught, I should say, from 5 to 15 miles off the land. Q. Were you in Port Mulgrave that season 7–A. No. 2436 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Your whole catch that year, in your two trips, was 480% barrels, which went home to Gloucester ?–A. Yes. Q. Have you the means of telling how much you made that year your- self or how your vessel did?—A. I could not give the exact Stock, but it was somewhere in the neighborhood of $7,000. Q. What was the quality of the mackerel ?—A. They were ones, and tWOS. Q. With what firm did you fit out 7—A. Shute & Merchant, of Glou- cester, who owned the vessel. Q. And they packed out the mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. What have you been doing since %—A. Principally seining around on the coast of the United States. Q. What did you do in 1874, seining?—A. I did not go out until June, and I believe We landed 800 barrels. How many trips did you make 3–A. Four, after the 1st of June. . What were you doing in 1875?—A. Seining, after the 1st of June. . Did you go cod-fishing in the spring 8–A. Yes. . Where ?—A. To Sable Island Bank. . How early did you begin your seining for mackerel ?—A. By the 1st of June. Q. And you took 500 barrels?—A. Yes. Q. In 1876, where were you ?—A. In the same business as in 1875; I was cod-fishing in the spring. Q. When did you begin seining 3–A. About the same time, the 1st of June. Q. How did you succeed last year 7—A. We did very well. Q. How many barrels did you get 2—A. I was in two different ves- sels; and last spring I did not go cod-fishing at all. Q. What did you do in your vessel?—A. We went south for mackerel in her. We went away down the coast seining. Q. How many barrels did you take on the first trip 3–A. We carried 100 barrels into New York fresh and we carried home 270 barrels. Q. You got 370 barrels 3—A. Yes; 100 we sold in New York and 270 we packed. - - Q. How long were you making that trip 3—A. About 6 weeks, I think. Q. What did you do afterwards 2—A. I went seining in another ves- Sel. Q. How many barrels did you take 3–A. About 500, I think—during the best of the Season. - Q. How many then did you get on the whole %–A. About 870 barrels during the whole summer. Q. What were you doing last spring 7–A. I did not do anything until I went seining. Q. How many mackerel did you take this spring 7–A. I cannot tell exactly, because we sold the most of them fresh in New York; we iced them and carried them in fresh. Q. You did not sell them by the barrel ?—A. No. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Where did you go fishing?—A. To the southward of New York. By Mr. Foster: - Q. How many barrels did you pack besides the fresh ones?—A. After We were done with the fresh ones we brought in 330 barrels salted. $ Q. What was the vessel's stock 7–A. She stocked on the first trip 5,112. : AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2437 Q. How long did it take you to do that ?—A. About 7 weeks, or prob- ably rather 8 weeks. Q. Whereabouts were these fish taken 3–A. All the way from 20 miles north of Hatteras to as far north as Nantucket. §, Q. Where did you go on your next trip this season 3—A. Down on the coast of Maine; we were a short time gone; we could not find any fish, and so we came home again. Q. What did you do?—A, I believe we stocked about $500 on the Second trip. Q. Did you make a third trip this year?—A. Yes. Q. Where?—A. At Block Island. Q. What was your luck there?—A. It was very good, considering. Q. How many barrels did you take?—A. 130. Q. What did they sell for ?—A. $22.50 and $23.50 a barrel. We sold them at Gloucester; they were Block Island mackerel. Q: What was your stock?—A. I could not tell exactly, but we shared $79 each, and there were 14 men. Q: What was the total amount all your trips this summer stocked, Seined on the United States coast 2—A. I heard it talked of at the time, and I think that it was somewhere in the neighborhood of $8,000. Q. That was the result of the stocking out 7–A. Yes; that was the total stock. - Q. When did you cease fishing this summer ?—A. About the 1st of August. Y Q. And Soon afterwards you came up in the Speedwell as pilot 3–A. €S. Q. You have been several times in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and you have fished over our own coast from Hatteras up, and I should like to ask you a few questions respecting the food of the mackerel—where do you find it?—A. We find it usually from 20 to 50 miles off the land, during the early part of the season; generally we do not then find any food at the surface of the water; so their food at this time consists of Shrimps and sand fleas, which we find inside of the fish. Q. What do you find later ?—A. We then find what we call red seed —I do not know its proper name, but it is something that looks round and red—with shrimps and little small fish of different kinds. Q. How far out at sea have you found this food, this red stuff?—A.. I have seen it, I may safely say, 40 miles southeast of George's. Q. In what quantities?—A. I could not exactly say, because when We are out that way of course, if we see any fish, we have not much time to look after anything else. Q. Have you found it in abundance or in small quantities? A. Some years it is very abundant, and more years when the mackerel ao not play out that way, there probably won’t be so much of it. Q. Where and when do the mackerel first appear on the United States coast in spring 2—A. We first find them somewhere abreast of Hatteras or a little to the northward of it—20 miles north of Hatteras. Q. At what date?—A. From the 20th to the 25th of April. Q. When are they at Cape Delaware ?—A. That depends upon the Weather; if you have northerly and easterly winds they won’t come up Very fast ; they will then come very slowly along the coast, but if you have moderate southerly and westerly winds they will naturally work along a little faster than if it was a cold and backward spring. They Vary considerably in the time of their appearance. Q. Give us the average approximate dates when they make their ap- pearance off Cape Delaware.—A. It is something like fifteen days per- 2438 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. haps at the average, but if it is not a moderate season it would probably be from fifteen to eighteen days. Q. I want to learn the average date of their appearance off Cape Delaware; which is the earliest and which the latest date 2—A. It would be somewhere about the 10th of May, and perhaps sometimes a little earlier than that. Q. At what date do they reach Sandy Hook 3–A. Probably about the 15th of May they arrive there, and afterward they reach Montak Point, at the east end of Long Island. They stop longer off New York than off any other part of the coast. We cannot tell exactly when they come to Montak, because after they leave the grounds off New York We think they go to the bottom and spawn; the schools are then broken up a great deal at certain points; after they go along the coast of Long Island, or get down that way, they do not appear to be in as great a body as they are off New York; they do not school so often in these quarters. Q. And you think that the schools begin to break up at that point 3– A. Yes; as a general thing. - By Sir Alexander Galt: Q. Is that at Sandy Hook 7–A. It occurs east of it on the coast of Long Island. By Mr. Foster: Q. When do the mackerel reach the vicinity of Cape Cod and Nan- tucket 2—A. The schools vary considerably in this respect. The fish that pass through by the Vineyard get through early, but the fish that go outside do not get along quite so early. Sometimes part of them will get down through by the Vineyard by the 1st of June, or perhaps the 10th of June; but the fish that go outside will be a little later. Q. Where are the spawning places for mackerel off the United States coast 2—A. We think that a great quantity of them spawn on the South- west part of George's Bank and about Nantucket Shoals, off Sankaty Head, and on the fishing-ground off there; a large fishing-ground is situated Southeast or east of Nantucket. Q. Coming north of Nantucket Shoals, where are the spawning grounds found 3–A. Sankaty Head is where there is a light-house on the eastern part of Nantucket Island, I believe. Q. Southwest from George's Bank 3–A. Yes. Q. Where do you find their spawning grounds, to the northward of this?—A. On the different Banks around Massachusetts Bay, I Sup- pose, though I never caught any spawning there, but I have caught mackerel there at different times out of which spawn would run. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. At what date was this the case?—A. Probably from the 1st to the 15th of June; those fish do not all spawn at the same time. This depends on the time when they arrive on the coast. Those that pass through the Vineyard do not generally spawn until after they get through. By Mr. Foster: Q. Give the earliest and the latest dates for the spawning season at the different points on our coast 3–A. This would extend probably from the 15th of June to the 1st of July. Q. Then you think that their spawning is concluded on our coast by the 1st of July 3–A. Yes. - w Q. How long do the different spawning times for the schools of mack- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2489 erel last 2—A. Probably not more than 10 days, and perhaps not so long. When the mackerel are spawning, in our opinion, there is generally a dull spell, during which they do not school or go into deep Water, as they have gone down, we think, to spawn. We do not then catch many of them, and before this dull spell commences, the spawn is running out of a great many of them quite freely. When we find that they have come up again in bodies—which is probably ten days or a fortnight after the opening of the dull spell—we find that the spawn is out of them. Q. How soon do they begin to be in good condition after their spawn- ing is over ?—A. You can perceive that they have increased some in flesh in a fortnight's time afterwards. Q. Name the points on the American coast at which the mackerel are taken in large quantities, beginning to the Southward, and running northward, and the particular seasons when these fish are abundant at these points?—A. We find quite a body of fish after their spawning is through, out near the south shoal lightship at Nantucket, and off to the eastward of Nantucket Island; southeast of that we find quite a body of mackerel after their spawning is done, some years; and some years there will not be so many there; but generally a number of fish are taken there. # - By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. When does this take place 2—A. From the 25th of June to the 10th of July, sometimes; the dates vary some. - By Mr. Foster: Q. Mention the most southerly point where the mackerel are found in abundance 3—A. We never find any extra fishing until we get some- where near half-way between Cape Cod and Sandy Hook; along the coast there we find the fish considerably plentiful. We find them there north of the light-ship—say 20 miles north of it, off Delaware. Q. How many mackerel did you ever know to be taken in one day there, by one vessel ?—A. I have known 100 barrels to be taken there by vessels in one day. Q. When you were with them 3–A. Yes; I saw them at the time. Q. When was this?—A. Somewhere along about the 1st of May. Q. That was before they had spawned ?–A. Yes; the date when they are so caught there varies sometimes; it is sometimes later and some- times earlier. We Sometimes take large quantities off Barnegat, from 15 to 45 miles off the land. Q. Where is Barnegat?—A. It is situated probably five-eighths of the way from Cape Cod to Sandy Hook. Q. How large a quantity have you known to be taken off Barnegat by the vessel ?—A. Sometimes we get in one haul there 150 barrels and perhaps more. I have been there when 140 barrels were taken in a day at one haul of the Seine. - Q. When was that ?–A. Probably from the 1st to the 5th of May. Q. What is the next point farther north 2–A. Off New York, and Sandy Hook. Q. When are they caught there?—A. Perhaps from the 5th to the 10th of May, and may be a little later. The fish remain some time off New York; their stay depends on the weather. Q. How large a catch have you known to be taken in one day there?— A. This last spring we took as high as 180 barrels at one haul there. Q. Which is the next point %—A. After the mackerel get by there, We do not find anything that is extra good fishing until we get down 2440 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. towards the South Shoal light-ship, near Nantucket; perhaps there may be some at Montauk, but there are not so many there as down about the light-ship. There is no extra good fishing near Montauk dur- ing the first part of the season. Q. How large a catch have you known to be made there ?—A. The schools at this point are generally broken up a great deal. Q. You think that the Schools break up 7–A. Yes. Q. How many barrels have you ever known to be taken there in one day ?—A. Perhaps from 20 to 40 barrels. Q. What is the next place?—A. The next place, where we find large schools, is down about the South Shoal light-ship. Q. You have omitted to mention Block Island?—A. Well, we do not find mackerel there to any amount early in the summer. Q. How early do you find them there 3—A. We find them there in Small schools about the same time as off Montauk. Q. What is the season for fishing at Block Island 3–A. Along in midsummer. Q. After they have spawned ?–A. Yes; fish have been caught this Summer near Montauk Point. Those are fish that do not come north any farther, but stay at Block Island all summer. Q. Give an account of Block Island mackerel-fishing, and state the Quality caught, the times when taken, and the quantities of the catches made there.—A. They have been taken this year there in very small schools, and as low as 5 barrels in a school, though there have been as high as 200 barrels taken in a school this summer after the 1st of July; there was nothing done before that there of any account. Q. How was the fishing last year at Block Island?—A. We did not have any vessels there last summer. One or two vessels went there and staid a short time, and two out of that number got trips. Q. What is the quality of Block Island mackerel?—A. These fish are Commonly large enough and long enough for extra ones. Q. By that you mean mess mackerel?—A. Yes. Q. What are they sold for ?—A. I do not know what price they have brought this summer. We did not mess our mackerel; but probably they will bring from $26 to $27 a barrel. Q. Is their price a good deal higher than that of any other mackerel Which comes to the market 2—A. Yes. Q. Where is the next place at which the mackerel are found in abun- dance?—A. East of Block Island. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. When are the fine mackerel which you have just mentioned taken? —A. From the last of July and all through August. By Mr. Foster: Q. You say that this school of mackerel does not go farther north ?— A. Yes. Q. Explain why you think so. —A. I say so because we do not catch any schools of that sized mackerel any distance to the nor’ard of this point, or more than 20 miles to the north of Block Island. We get an odd mackerel, overgrown, in a school, once in a while, but we do not meet with schools of such mackerel any distance north of Block Island. Q. You are satisfied that this school goes no father north 3–A. Yes. Q. Is that the commonly received opinion ?—A. We have never taken notice of this fact until of late years, although those fish were there pre- viously. Those who have fished there during different seasons tell me that these fish have been there every season for a number of years. AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2441 Q. Where is the next place at which mackerel are taken 3–A. We do not take many after we leave this point until we reach Nantucket. Q. When are they found there ?—A. After they have spawned. Q. Give the dates as near as you can in this regard.—A. They are found here from the 20th or the 25th of June until the 10th of July per- haps; this would be about the period during which the largest body of fish is met with at this point. Nº Is there a school which stays about Nantucket all summer ?—A. IN O. Q. Why do they go there?—A. I do not know. I suppose that part of them go there to spawn. This is where we miss them after they first come there; we lose the fish that first come on the coast there for a Short time. § Q. What is the greatest catch which you have known to be made in a day by one vessel off Nantucket 2—A. I have known vessels take a School, which they could not handle, there in a day; they would have to let a large quantity of the fish go out before they could handle the SéIIl 6, Q. What is the largest number of barrels which you have known to be brought on deck 3–A. We took 200 barrels there this Summer, and, after taking this quantity out, we gave the Seine over to another Vessel which took out an additional 150 barrels, and then a shark went through the Seine, tearing it to pieces, so they lost the rest, and consequently We do not know how many barrels were in the Seine. - Q. Why did you give away 150 barrels 3–A. Because we could not dress any more than we had taken out. We had all we could take care of in good weather. Q. And you know that 350 barrels were taken out of the Seine before the shark destroyed it 3–A. Yes. Q. When was this 3—A. I cannot give the exact date, but it happened Some time between the 5th of June and the 10th of July. Q. Had the fish then spawned ?–A. Yes. Q. It was after the mackerel were in good condition ?—A. We got a Very small quantity of twoš out of this catch, and twos were the best We could get out of them at that time of the year. Q. What is the case north of Nantucket Shoals 7–A. We will find that same body of fish after they leave that place on George's Bank. Q. Have you seined there ?—A. Yes. Q. What is the largest quantity which you have known one vessel to Seine there in one day ?—A. I can Only speak in this relation concern- ing vessels in which I have myself been. We have taken 100 and 110 barrels at a haul there. 1% At what time during the summer?—A. Probably about the 20th of July. Q. Were those mackerel in good condition ?–A. There were some OneS among them then. Q. They had fattened up some 3—A. Yes. Q. Where is the next point at which mackerel are found 3–A. The next point of any consequence is situated on the coast of Maine, near Monhegan and Mount Desert Islands. Monhegan Island lies off the mouth of the Penobscot. Q. How far is this from Mount Desert 2—A. I do not know exactly, but it is somewhere about 40 miles from it. Q. is that in the Bay of Penobscot?—A. This island lies off shore— off the western part of Penobscot Bay, outside. Q. How large an island is it?—A. I cannot tell exactly. 2442 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Has it any inhabitants?—A. Yes; quite a number of fishermen live on it. I suppose it has 100 inhabitants, and perhaps more. It belongs to the State of Maine. Q. How large a catch have you known to be made there in a day by one vessel ?—A. We do not generally catch there more than from 100 to 125 barrels in a haul. Sometimes, however, vessels get more there; but I have known that to be done in a day. Q. When 7–A. From the last of July along through August. . Q. What is the quality of the fish caught in this locality ?—A. All that are large and long enough are fit for number ones. Q. What does this indicate with respect to fatness?—A. There are no particularly long ones; but at that time of the year, they are fat enough for ones, if they are long enough. Q. What is the next place”—A. Well, we remain there the bigger part of the season until the mackerel begin to move westward again. Q. Do you not go nearer to Mount Desert than that ?—A. We find the best fishing between Monbegan Island and Mount Desert; this is the ground we fish on from the last of July all through August. Q. Over how large a space 3—A. Along a coast of 40 miles perhaps, and perhaps a little more; we fish all the way from 10 to 50 miles off the Shore there out to Jeffrey's Bank, and even farther than that. At this point the examination of this witness was interrupted by con- Sent of the Commission, to allow of the hearing of other testimony. No. 43. CASTANUs M. SMALLEY, fisherman, of Belfast, Me., was called on be- half of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Dana : Question. Did you sail out of Rockland or Belfast 3—Answer. My Vessel sails from Rockland. - Q. When did you begin to go fishing 7–A. In 1858. Q. Did you fish during 1858, 1859, and 1860 ?—A. Yes. Q. In the bay ?—A. Yes. Q. How many trips did you make in 1858%—A. One. Q. How many fish did you then catch 7–A. 200 barrels. Q. Did you catch any of these within three miles of the shore ?—A. NO; they were all taken on Banks Orphan and Bradley. Q. How many barrels did you catch in 1859%—A. About 175. Q. And in 1860?–A. About 200 barrels. Q. Did you pack out that number 2—A. These were what we call sea- barrels. Q. Did you try to fish inshore ?—A. Yes. Q. In what way ?—A. With hooks and lines and bait. Q. Did you go in and drift out 2—A. Yes; we hardly ever anchor When we are fishing for mackerel. Q. What portion of your fish, at the outside, do you think you caught inshore within three miles of the coast in 1860?—A. Possibly one-third. Q. That is the outside figure ?—A. Yes. Q. Where did you find the most and the best mackerel during these three years—inshore or off shore ?—A. Off shore. Q. There is no question about that ?–A. No. • Q. After 1860 you were not fishing for some years?—A. Yes. Q. How many ?—A. I think that I started fishing again in 1866, the year after the War. * AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2443 . In what vessel were you in 1858?—A. The Georgiana, of Cohasset. . And in 1859%—A.. I was then in the same vessel. . And in 1860?–A. I was then in the Star of Hope, of Cohasset. - ... Were you in the service of the United States in the Army 3—A. Yes. . When did you join the Army 2–A. In July, 1862. And until when did you stay in it 3–A. Until the 7th of June, i 1865. Q. When did you next go fishing 2—A. I next went to the bay, I think, in 1867. Q. Did you fish in 1866?—A. Yes. Q. Where ?—A. Partly on our shore. Q. In a fishing-vessel ?—A. Yes. Q. For what ?—A. Mackerel. Q. At what part of the American shore did you fish 7–A. We fished all the way from Mount Desert Rock to Cashes Ledge and Cape Cod. Q. In 1867 you came to the bay ?—A. Yes. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you then catch 3—A. About 200. . - Q. What was the name of your vessel that year?—A. The Florence Reed. Q. Where did you fish 7–A. At the Magdalen Islands. . Did you catch all your fish there ?—A. Yes. . Did you have a license in 1867 ?–A. Yes. . And still you caught all your fish off the Magdalen Islands 2—A. § . And made no use of your license 3—A. No. . Where did you fish in 1868?—A. On our shore. . For mackerel ?—A. For codfish and mackerel. . Between Mount Desert and Cape Cod 2–A. For mackerel; yes. . Where did you fish for cod 7–A. On the Western Bank for the Spring trip. Q. Were you in the bay in 1869 7–A. Yes. Q. And also in 1870 ?—A. Yes. Q. What did you catch in 1870?–A. We carried out of the bay that year 200 barrels. - Q. That was the last time that you were then in the bay ?—A. Yes. Q. What did you fit for 7—A. That was all the vessel would carry; We were full. I am in the same vessel now. Q. What is her name 2—A. The Esperanza. Q. What portion of your fish was caught broad off shore and more than three miles from the coast 3—A. From one-third to one-half were taken off shore and the rest, eel-grass mackerel, were caught inshore. Q. Where ?—A. Principally around Prince Edward Island. Q. Of what quality were these mackerel ?—A. They were poor. Q. How came you to fish there for poor mackerel; were there none to be caught outside?—A. I presume that some were to be caught out- side at the time, but if a man gets a catch of fish inshore, he is liable to Stop there and see if he can get another one. Q. Where were you fishing in 1871 and 1872?–A. On the American COaSt. Q. Were you fishing for cod and mackerel ?—A. We were cod-fishing On the spring trips, and we fished for mackerel during the rest of the Season. In the spring we were on the Western Bank and not on the Grand Bank. - Q. How did you do?—A. Very well, indeed. ; 2444 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Were you in 1873 in the bay again 3–A. Yes. Q. In what vessel were you in 1868 %–A. The Esperanza. Q. Were you in the same vessel in 1869 %—A. Yes. Q. Have you been in her ever since %—A. No. Q. In 1869 you were in her ?—A. Yes. Q. In 1870 ?–A. Yes. Q. In 1871%—A. Yes. Q. In 1872?—A. I was in her. Q. In 1873 you were in the bay again 3–A. Yes. Q. How many trips?—A. I made one in the vessel myself and came down, and the second trip I stopped ashore. Q. Was that the Esperanza 3—A. No, it was the Ernest F. Norwood. Q. How many did you catch 3–A. 230. I am pretty positive it was that. - Q. Did you hear anything about the second trip 7–A. I heard it was 260. Q. You learned that from whom ?—A. From the master, Captain Adams. Q. Is it true that the vessel got 400 barrels the second trip 3—A. No, I do not think it is. # Q. Why not ?—A. In the first place, I do not think the master would lie about it, and in the second place the vessel could not carry them. Q. That was in 1873, you are sure?—A. Yes. Q. Those 230 caught when you were on board her, where were they taken 3—A. They were principally taken from Bank Orphan to East POrt. Q. Offshore?—A. Well, I should say so. I mean the principal part of them was taken off shore. Q. How many of the 230 do you think were taken near inshore?—A. Well, it is a pretty hard matter for a man to stand on deck and tell whether it is within three or six miles, but a man's judgment would lead him. I should say that perhaps one-third of the whole trip was taken within between three and five miles. Q. Do you think you took any within less?—A. Yes, there might be SOD16. Q. What proportion of the whole was taken within less than three miles?—A. There might be 30 or 40. Q. You tried inside and outside 3–A. Yes, we always did that. Q. And you found a small catch inside, while they were largest and most numerous Outside 3—A. Yes. Q. In 1874, you were ashore?—A. Yes. Q. In 1875, you were at home. In 1876 where were you?—A. I was fishing. e Q. Where?—A. In the bay. Q. Were you cod-fishing early in the spring 2—A. Yes. Q. How many months did you fish for cod?—A. We generally calcu- lated to get ready about the 20th of March and return somewhere about June. Q. Then you would go off in July to the bay for mackerel ?—A. Yes. I believe I went through Canseau last year, the 26th day of July. I am pretty positive it was the 26th. Q. When did you return?—A. I came out of the bay somewhere be- tween the 2d and 5th of September; at any rate, I was home the day of Our State election. Q. What day is the State election?—A. It is, I think, the second Mon- day in September. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2445 Q. You made two trips when in the bay. How was it that year 3– A. Very dull. - Q. Did you try inshore and outshore both 2–A. Yes. Q. Now in 1877, this year, when did you go into the bay ?–A. I went to the bay in August. I went through Canseau. Q. Are you in here for harbor 7—A. Yes. Q. When did you come in 3–A. Day before yesterday. Q. Are you homeward bound 3–A. Yes. Q. When did you leave the fishing-grounds, or come through the Gut 3–A. We came through Canseau a week ago; we came last Satur- day. Q. How much did you get all this time?—A. 110 barrels. Q. And you tried inshore and outshore both º–A. Yes. Q. What parts of the bay have you been 3–A. We have been from What we call the West Shore to Port Hood. Q. You fished all around 3—A. Yes. Q. And that is the best you could do 2–A. Yes. t Q. How much can your vessel carry 7–A. I fitted for 200. We had a small vessel. & Q. This won’t pay?—A. No, I don’t think it will. Q. Did you heave to in the Bend ?–A. Yes, I tried coming down. We hove to two or three times. Q. Did you find anything ?—A. Perhaps we might catch half a dozen mackerel. Q. Not half a dozen barrels 3–A. No. Q. Those were not very large were they 3–A. Well, they were what we term No. 2, small fry. Q. You have been codfishing how many seasons, do you think, in all ?—A. I have been codfishing five seasons in the same vessel. That is what we term spring fishing, not the season right through. t Q. Have you used salt bait or fresh 3–A. Salt bait always, with the exception of one trip that we caught mackerel and had them spoil on Our hands. l Q. Did you find the salt bait successful ?—A. Yes. Q. Hand-lining 3—A. Yes. Q. Have you a trawl also 3–A. No, sir. Q. You haven’t found it necessary to go in for fresh bait 3–A. No, sir. By Mr. Weatherbe: Q. I don’t know whether you mentioned the number of barrels you caught in 1876?—A. I don’t think I was asked it. Q. About how many ?—A. 120 barrels. Q. What vessel had you in 1876?–A. The Esperanza. Q. The same as now %—A. Yes. Q. What is her tonnage %—A. 43 tons, American tonnage. Q. She got pretty well for that tonnage 3—A. Well, we didn’t call it so, with 12 men. Q. Are 12 men a fair average number in a vessel that size?—A. Yes, S11’, Q. You caught one-third inshore? Is that the average 3—A. Yes, sir, generally. Q. It is, in your best judgment 3–A. In my best judgment we gen- erally caught one-third or somewhere about that. Q. That would be a fair average, I Suppose?--A. Yes, sir. Q. Sometimes more and sometimes less, but from one-third to one-half? Mr. DANA. He didn’t say that, 24.46 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Mr. DAVIES. He said from one-third to one-half were taken inshore. Q. You said you took two-thirds or one-half offshore ?—A. No, sir. Q. Do you think that would be an average, one-third inshore; that would be a fair average of the fishing of the mackerel-vessels inshore generally 3–A. Generally speaking, of some vessels. There are some vessels that hang around inshore that are not fit to go out. Q. They would catch more inshore ?—A. Yes, and poorer fish. Q. One-third, you think, would be a fair average for large vessels?— A. I am not going to speak of others besides my own. Q. One-third would be a fair average %–A. What I took out of the bay, one-third was caught by the three-mile limit; but we might have been a little further off or a little nearer in. It is a hard matter to judge. Q. Do you think there is any considerable number of those poorer vessels that can’t fish further out but hang inshore ?—A. There is quite a number of them that never come by East Point. They daren’t go up in the bend. Q. They are American vessels 3–A. Some are, and some are not. Q. About what proportion would you consider to be a fair propor- tion of American vessels that hug the shore that way?—A. I should say there was four-fifths of them American vessels, because there is not a great many English vessels that fish. Q. What proportion of the fleet, I mean, that come into the gulf, hug the shore that way and catch fish more inshore ?—A. There might be one in twenty-five sail. Q. Do you think there would be that many ?—A. Yes; there might be one in twenty-five. Q. You have seen them, I suppose, in the different years you have been in the gulf?—A. Yes; there are always two or three hanging round in harbors that dare not try it outside. There are plenty of those poor vessels. Q. You used a term, eel-grass mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. Well, is that a term that is used on your shores at all ?—A. That is a term that all those fishermen use when they catch mackerel inshore. They are an inferior quality, with black bellies. I have some of them on board now. - Q. Is it a term in use on your own shores 3–44. Yes. Q. Then you consider that your mackerel caught inshore are inferior to those caught outside 3—A. Yes; we think that is so anywhere. Q. Couldn't you catch the best mackerel on your shore in close?—A. Well, there are times when the mackerel will run in there to chase the bait in. Q. Is it not the fact that the best mackerel are caught inside at Block Island 7–A. I never fished there. I don’t think they catch any in Block Island, within five or six miles of it. Q. Are you acquainted with Rustico 3–A. I have been up and down there. - Q. Are not they the very best quality of mackerel caught?—A.. I would not call them so. - Q. That would be a matter of opinion ?—A. Well, I could not call them so. I prefer fishing in a little deeper water. To make good, nice, white fish I prefer them caught in deeper water. Q. What depth would you say?—A. I want them over eight fathoms.. You can’t get a very big depth in the Bay of St. Lawrence anywhere until you sail to the northward. - Q. Now, don't you think the same fish go out and in. Is it your idea that certain schools keep in one place and certain Schools in AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2447 another? Is it not your idea that the same mackerel go out and in 3– A. Yes, it is my opinion that the mackerel go out and in, and we know they do. But it is my positive idea that the best fish that go into the Bay Chaleurs go through the strait and by Sydney. Q. Do you mean the Strait of Canso 3–A. No, the Strait of Belleisle and come down to Sydney. Q. What time?—A. Well, they are passing up and down there after the month of August until they all go out. Q. You think these are not the same as you catch off the north of the island 3—A. No, I don't. Q. Do you think your opinion is general 3—A. Yes, Sir. +. Q. That they are a different class of fish altogether ?—A. Yes. Q. Might it not be just that you catch them later in the year when they are fatter?—A. Well, after September comes in they don’t fat up much. Q. Don't you think it is because you get later and fatter mackerel ?— A. No, I don’t think that is the reason. I don’t think fish fatten any after the middle of September. Q. At any rate take the coast of the island itself. If you fish out in deep water you think you catch better fish 7–A. Yes. Q. Then you must be under the impression that they divide and the best remain outside while the poor ones come inside 3—A. I don’t know but what one fish is as good as another, but it takes food to make the fish. Q. Is it not a fact that they feed in close to the shore ?—A. There is food, but not such healthy food as outside. Q. That is your theory 3––A. Yes. Q. Then it is altogether a question of food. You think they get better food inside 3–A. Yes. - Q. And if it turned out that they got better food inshore you would change your opinion ? You would say, then, that you would catch more Imackerel inshore than off? If you found that the mackerel got their food inshore, you would perhaps change your opinion with regard to the matter?—A. Well, if there was better fish inshore than off, I should know there was better food inshore. Q. Well, if the mackerel feed in eight fathoms, wherever that is, to- day, are they not to be found inshore to-morrow? Don't the same mackerel move about?—A. They move just which way the food moves. Q. Then they move about everywhere?—A. Well, I could not say for that. I have caught mackerel for four or five days in one place and not Seen any again for three weeks. t - Q Was that the same school, do you think, or were they moving about 3—A. I think the fish was moving about. Q. The first you encountered would be away, and others would fill their places?—A. Yes. - Q. Off the bend of the island will you not find eight fathoms within a mile of the island in many places 7–A. Yes, there are many places there that you will find eight fathoms within a mile, I presume. Q. Within half a mile "—A. Well, I never looked personally on the Chart. I never calculated to stop around there a great deal, anyhow. Q: What you mean is, that if you find them in eight fathoms you Would get the best mackerel there ?—A. No, I don’t mean that. Q. Well, suppose you would catch them in eight fathoms, would you Call them eel-grass mackerel ?—A. No, if they were nice fish I should not. If they were poor fish, with black bellies, I would call them ell- #. mackerel. It doesn’t make any odds if they were caught in two a UſłOIllS. 2448 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 44. EDWARD A. GOOGINS, of Portland, Maine, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, Sworn and examined. By Mr. Dana: Question. You are in what vessel now %–Answer. The Esperanza. . You are in here accidentally 3–A. Yes. You came in here for a harbor 7—A. Yes. . You are bound home 3—A. Yes. . You have got through your fishing 3–A. Yes. . Now, when did you begin to go fishing?—A. When I was 14 years Q . You were born in the year 7—A. 1834. . That would make it 1848 when you went fishing 2—A. Yes. . Where were you living then 3–A. At Trenton, Maine. That is the custom-house district of Ellsworth 3–A. Yes. . At that time when you first went fishing where did you go?—A. I went to Grand Manan. Q. How many years were you fishing off Grand Manan 7–A. Seven years. - Q. Until you were 21?—A. Yes. - Q. Were you a skipper any of that time 3–A. No ; I was always a hand. *g Q. Seven years you were a Trenton fisherman off Grand Manan 3–A. Yes; Grand Manan and Nova Scotia. Q. Now, where did you first go when the season began 2–A. In the Spring 3 *- Q. Yes.—A. Around Nova Scotia. & Q. To what part 3–A. Digby, Petit Passage, and Brier Island. Q. For what ?—A. Codfish. - Q. That was spring fishing 2—A. Yes. Q. During these seven seasons in the spring, when you caught cod off that part of Nova Scotia, where did you catch them 3 How far from land?—A. The principal part 12 miles from land; we judged 12, 14, or 15. * Q. Did you ever know of the distance being measured any time?—A. Only once; around the island. - Q. What was the nearest to land that you ever fished?—A. Four miles. - Now, how do you know it was four miles?—A. Well, there was a lit- tle dispute there. The natives of the island made a complaint to a man- of-war that the American fishermen fished within three miles of the land; and the place they called within three miles was “Gravelly Bot- tom,” on the southeast part of Grand Manan, right off from Grand Manan, at the southeast end. They measured, and found it was four miles from the nearest land to where the American fishermen fished. Inside of that is deep water. On that it is shoal. Q. So you were fishing on a shoal %—A. Yes; shoal water. Q. It turned out to be four miles 3–A. Yes. Q. That is the nearest you ever went 7–A. Yes; the nearest I ever fished in an American vessel. e Q. And your codfish you caught twelve or fifteen miles off?—A. That is the nearest we could judge. Q. While you were fishing for cod there what bait did you use 7–A. Herring. | AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2449 Q. Did you go in for it 2–A. We went in for it. Q. To what place 3—A. A number of places. Q. Whatever place was nearest ?—A. Yes. Q. When did you generally go, on what day ?—A. Generally on Satur- day. We used to calculate to go in on Saturday, because we didn’t fish on Sundays. Q. None of your vessels fished on Sundays?—A. None I know of. Q. Do you know any American vessels that fished inside of three miles 2—A. No ; I never heard of any. Q. Well, you would meet them going in for bait 7–A. Yes. Q. Was it the custom to talk very freely with one another ?—A. Yes. Q. Do you think you got free and honest reports of where they fished ?—A. Well, very near, for the very reason that we lived right close by one another. We could find out after a while. Q. Do you know of any, during those seven seasons, that fished nearer than three miles 3–A. No. Q. Was that cod fishery pretty successful ?–A. Sometimes it was, and sometimes not. Q. Taken as a whole %–A. Yes, it was, taken as a whole. Q. Did you move to Grand Manan to live 2–A. Yes. Q. When did you move to Grand Manan 2 The next year after you were twenty-one 7–A. The next year after. Q. You had a house there and were married ?–A. No ; I was married; my wife belonged to the island. Q. You went to Grand Manan to live 3–A. Yes. Q. You engaged in fishing?—A. Yes. Q. Boat-fishing 2—A. Yes. Q. You changed from vessel-fishing to boat-fishing?—A. Yes. Q. Describe this boat-fishing. How big were the boats?—A. Twenty feet keel. Q. She had no forecastle?—A. No ; only a small temporary cuddy we rigged up ourselves. Q. I will go back to the time you were fishing in vessels. Why was it you didn’t fish nearer than four miles 7–A. One reason was that they Would not allow us, and another reason was that we could not do as Well. Q. If you had been allowed, if you had been left to your own prefer- ences, which would you do?—-A. We would prefer to fish outside, for the reason that the boats were in there and they could get more bait than We got. Their own vessels that were there could not do so well inside as Outside at the time I was there. Q. What did you learn from the inhabitants, as well as from the ves- Sels, as to the American vessels 2 Did they ever tell you that the American vessels were within three miles 2–A. No, I never heard only the one complaint. That was before I went there to live, and while I was there to live I never heard any complaints of the American vessels fish- ing inside. - - Q. How long were you there?—A. I was there nine years. Q. During these nine years you had a boat or boats about 20 feet in length 7–A. Yes. * Q. Intended for a single day ?—A. Yes. Q. To come in nights?—A. Yes. We took our dinners with us. Q. Tell me, if you please, what fishing you did the different Seasons of the year in boats?—A. Well, in the spring we used to commence in May generally, sometimes a little earlier. 154 F : 2450 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What did you catch then 2–A. We would catch a very few cod- fish, mostly hake. Q. Well, the hake is a rather inferior fish 7–A. Yes. Q. Were they plenty or few º–A. They were scattering along in the spring. We didn’t calculate to do a great deal anyway. Q. Now you have fished seven years outside for cod and nine years in boats, I suppose mostly inside 7–A. Yes, mostly inside. Q. You can therefore compare them. Now which furnished the great- est number and the best fish 7–A. Outside. Q. There is no question about it"—A. No question about that. Q. The hake is an inferior fish for eating. What does it furnish 7– A. It furnishes most oil of anything. Q. What is next? After a few scattered cod and hake principally, what is next 3–A. The next is the hake in July and August to Sep- tember. We catch these by night. -> Q. Night fishing. What is next 3–A. Generally herring fishing in the fall. Q. From October to when 2–A. To Christmas or New Year. Q. That finishes the boat fishing for the season 7–A. No. Then after the herring strikes in one place, it comes in another, and we get enough for bait. In winter we get small codfish. They are small, but they will do for pickling. Q. And you set nets in the winter ?—A. Yes. Q. You set them from the Grand Manan 3–A. Yes. Q. Is it in the nets you catch small cod?—A. No ; with line. Q. Now, when the codfish are very abundant and better offshore, why did you take them inshore with boats?—A. Because I could be home every night to see my family. I had a house on the island, and I had a little place. I could take care of that and be at home. I could do my work and fish too. That is why I preferred boat fishing to vessel fish- ing. I would not have to be gone all the time. Q. Now, that year, 1865, you spoke of nine seasons when you were boat fishing—what did you then do?—A. I moved across into Maine. Q. Near Eastport”—A. Yes. Q. What is the name of the town 2–A. Trescot, Washington County. Q. How many years did you live at Trescot ?—A. I lived there from 1865 to the 28th of this last July. Q. All that time working on shore ?—A. Yes; I had nothing to do With fishing. This year I started fishing again. º Q. This vessel, the Esperanza, belongs to Rockland 3–A. Yes. Q. You were to the gulf?—A. Yes. - Q. How many were you fitted out for ?—A. I understood, when I left, we fitted for 240 barrels. g - Q. How much have you got in all ?—A. 110 barrels. Q. That is in sea-barrels”—A. Yes. Q. That is a very unfavorable result 3–A. Well, I should think so. I am not used to mackerel-fishing. - Q. You said the 28th July you went; did you go through Canso 7– A. Yes. Q. Do you recollect the date %–A, No. Q. How many days had you been out when you went through 2—A. We were some time getting ready from the time I went aboard. We Were ten days, I think, going down. Q. You can’t recollect the date of your going through 2–A. No. Q. You got in here night before last for harbor ?—A. Yes. Q. Have you been pretty well around the gulf?—A. Well, I never AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2451 was there before. . I could not tell you whether I have been pretty near around, or half, or a quarter of the Way. Q. Did you fish inshore as well as outside 3—A. Well, it is useless to ask me any questions about that. As the land is low there I Would not pass my judgment anything about this trip at all. Q. About the distance %–A. No. Q. This is your first experience of the bay mackerel-fishing 2—A. Yes. Q. It will probably be the last 2—A. I think very likely it will. I don’t think I made enough to entice me to go again. By Mr. Foster: Q. Your last knowledge of Grand Manan was the year 1865?–A. Yes. By Mr. Davies: Q. Off what shores did you fish this year in the Esperanza 2 Did you know the shores?—A. I didn’t know the shores; I was a stranger there. Q. You heard from those on board, though, what place"—A. They said they were fishing off the west shore, and there was one place they called North Cape, Prince Edward Island. t Q. East Point, Prince Edward Island, did you hear that?—A. Yes; I was there. We came down and up by it. Q. Up and down the shore of the island 7–A. We did not stop any- where. * Q. You stopped at both ends?—A. Yes; we fished there. Q. The fleet was fishing, I understand, chiefly about East Point and North Cape 2–A. Yes. Q. Many of them 2–A. I should judge around North Cape there were fifteen or sixteen sail, perhaps twenty. I did not count them. At East Point I should think something like fifty sail when we were there. Q. I suppose you didn’t make any inquiries What they caught 7–A. WO. Q. Did you go down the Cape Breton shore ?—A. Only to Port Hood. Q. Did you catch any there 7–A. I think fifteen barrels, off shore. Q. What other place?—A. I have mentioned all, except Georgetown. Q. Well, that is part of Prince Edward Island. Whatever fish you did catch were caught in one or other of those places A You could not tell how far off?—A. No ; you need not ask me any questions about that. Q. You could see the land 2–A. Yes. Q. You saw the cows walking on it 3–A. I don’t think—I don’t know that I ever saw one walking there; I don’t know that they keep any cattle. - Q. Did you go ashore ?—A. Once, in Georgetown. I saw a horse there once; that is the only kind of cattle I saw. Q. It is a pretty good country for horses?—A. I don’t know, I only S3, W OH 62. - Q. Speaking seriously, do you mean to say you can’t give an opinion as to the distance you were from the shore off East Point %–A. I could 110t. Q. The captain of the Esperanza said they were fitted out for 200 barrels, not 240,—A. Well, I might have made a mistake; I might have misunderstood. Q. What was the size of the vessel ?–A. 43 or 44 tons. . . . . . Q. She would not iike to carry more than 200 barrels. How many of a crew have you got 2—A. Ten men. . . . . Q. Just one question or two now about Grand Manan. You went in 1848, and fished for seven years on board American vessels?—A. Yes. 2452 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. . Q. You didn’t fish there in American vessels after the Reciprocity Treaty came in Ž It was before that that the complaint was made 7–A. I think it was. I was nothing but a boy at the time. Q. You paid very little attention to where you were fishing 3–A. I. know we were not fishing inside of that line, because there was nothing there to catch. - Q. There are plenty of fish to be caught within Ż–A. No. Q. The boat-fishing when you left there was chiefly inside 3 Am I not Correct in saying that the boats catch most of their fish inside º–A. Yes. Sometimes they go out, but very seldom. - - Q. I want to just understand correctly. Nearly all the fish caught by the boats are caught inside 3–A. Yes. Q. Then the fish are there to be caught 7–A. Yes. Q. Very well; and did you as a boy, fishing, pay particular attention to whether you were in or out 3—A. We knew we were out, because I know all the grounds we were on. We fished on them year after year. Q. You were asked why you didn't go in and said you were prohibited ; you said because the people didn’t allow you.-A. I said because a man- of-war didn’t allow us. Mr. DANA. He gave two reasons. Mr. DAVIES. I should say one would be quite sufficient. Mr. DANA. He could dodge a man-of-war if it was worth while. By Mr. Davies: Q. Would you dodge a man-of-war to get inside 7–A. I don’t know what I might do. I never had the chance to try. Q. The temptation was not thrown in your way. Now, I want to ask you, do you know anything about the fishing carried on there in Winter by American vessels?—A. I do not. Q. Then, for aught you know, they may fish inside altogether in win- ter?—A. They do not. Q. Did I understand you correctly that you understood nothing about it 3 You said you knew nothing about the fishing in there in winter.— A. No, nor summer either. Q. I asked if you had ever fished aboard an American vessel in Winter about Grand Manan.—A. No ; never. w Q. At any time of your life 2–A. No. Q. Did you ever see any fishing there in winter ?—A. No. Q. So you absolutely know nothing of it at all?—A. No; I absolutely know—— Q. Did I understand that you absolutely knew nothing of it at all ?— A. I don’t understand your question. I wish you would put it plainer. Q. I understand that you never fished on board a vessel in the winter about Grand Manan 3–A. I have said. Q. And also that you never saw an American vessel fishing in winter anywhere about the island 3–A. Well, I could not go over the island all at Once. I never heard about it. Q. Then am I correct in saying you know nothing about it 3–A.. I know nothing about it further than that. Q. I mean within or outside of three miles?—A.. I never saw any American vessel around there in the winter that I can recollect. Q. Then I am correct in saying you know nothing about whether they do or not ?—A. I never saw them. How can I tell ? Q. Do you know Walter B. McLaughlin 7–A. I have seen him. Q. How many years is it since you left Grand Manan altogether?—A. Twelve years, I think, or thirteen. I left in 1865. AWARD OF THE FISEHERY COMMISSION. 2453 Q. Then, since you have left Grand Manan you know nothing, I sup- pose, of the number of vessels 2—A. No ; I have never seen the island, that I recollect, since, any more than at a distânce. Q. As to the period during the last twelve years, you don't profess to Say anything about it at all ?—A. No. - Q. When you were there, after the end of the seven years, you fished in boats yourself?—A. Yes. w Q. What kind of a man is McLaughlin; a respectable man 2—A. He is Considered so. - Q. Is it possible that the fishing may have changed since you were there ? I will read Mr. McLaughlin's statement with reference to the Grand Manan fishery. He was asked: “Now, about how many Ameri- can vessels fish on the coast during the season ?” He answers: “It Would be hard to tell that. It has never been my duty to count them.” He was asked: “They come in large numbers and they greatly out- number ours?” He answers: “Yes; our people at Grand Manan fish but little in vessels.” He is asked again: “Do these vessels come in fish- ing within three miles?” And he answers: “At a certain time of the year. In winter it is entirely within. The fall and winter fishing is entirely within.” Now that may be the case for the last twelve years; #. don’t profess to know?—A. I don’t profess to know anything about that. By Mr. Dana : Q. While you were there you saw no American vessels fishing there?— A. No. No. 45. ISAAC BURGESS, of Belfast, Me., fisherman, called on behalf of th Government of the United States, sworn and examined. - By Mr. Foster : Question. You are one of the sharesmen on board the Eliza Poor, Captain Dickie, and are twenty-four years old 7–Answer. Yes. Q. When did you begin fishing for mackerel in the Gulf of St. Law- rence %–A. In 1868. ſº You must have been a little fellow then 2–A. Yes; fifteen years Old. Q. Do you remember the name of the schooner?—A. The Oak Grove, Captain Burgess. - Q. How many barrels did you take 2–A. 210 barrels. Q. Where was she from ?—A. Belfast. ! Q. How long was she taking them 2–A. She was somewhere in the neighborhood of seven or eight weeks. They were taken off shore on Bradley. - Q. Any within three miles 2—A. No. Q. Take the next time.—A. 1869. I was in the James Jewett, Cap- tain Henry Coombes. Q. Where from ?—A. Belfast. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did she take 3–A. 273. Q. Now where were these taken 3–A. On the West Shore, Escumi- nac, North Cape, East Point, and some at Magdalens. Q. Well, if any of those were taken within three miles of the shore, State at What place and how many”—A. I don’t think we caught any Within three miles of the shore. Q. What was the next year 7—A. 1872. 2.454 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What vessel ?—A. The Mary Louise, Oscar Fitch, captain, from Gloucester. - Q. What was her size 3—A. 70 tons, I think. Q. Did you make more than one trip 7–A. Two trips. - Q. When did you go into the gulf 3–A. We came in the first trip, I think, in June. Q. What did you do with that first trip 7–A. We took them back to Gloucester. * - - Q. How long were you gone the first trip º–A. About a month. Q. How many barrels did you get”—A. 273 barrels the first trip. Q. Where did you take them 3–A. We took them around the island, North Cape, and Magdalen Islands, Q. How many at the Magdalens?—A. We got half our trip there. Q. How many off the island?—A. Probably 40 or 50 barrels. Q. When fishing off the island, how near shore did you fish 7–A. I don’t think we fished less than four miles, four or five. Q. Where else did you catch any part of your trip?—A. Some between Port Hood and East Point. Q. Were those, any of them, within three miles?—A. No. Q. Did you get any within three miles that trip º–A. A few at a place called Rustico one day within three miles. That is all during that trip. Q. Well, how did you happen to be at Rustico 3–A. We saw some Small boats in fishing, springing up, and we went in there and tried them. It came on to blow that night and we had to go out. It was in the Bend, and we had to get off shore. Q. How many barrels did you get?—A. 80 barrels that day, near Rustico. Q. Take the next year 2—A. That was 1874. I was in the Alice, Salem, Captain Elbridge Love, of Booth Bay. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you take 7—A. 173 barrels. Q. How long were you getting them 3–A. Somewhere in the neigh- borhood of nine weeks. Q. When did you begin º–A. We came away from home about the 1st of August. We were a week, I believe, getting down. * Q. Where were those taken 3–A. They were taken at the Magdalens, Some around East Point, and some around Port Hood. The most of the trip at the Magdalen Islands. Q. Now the Alice, Salem, is put down that year as having come in on the 9th August one trip, and having gone home the 15th of October. Are those dates about right & Did you begin about August and end about the 15th October 2—A. I think we did. & Q. But she is said to have taken 275 barrels 2—A. 173 barrels was all We got aboard when I was aboard. Q. Who Was the fish merchant to whom she packed out?—A. Charles A. Dyer. Q. May you be mistaken 100 barrels 2–A. No ; I am not. Q. Most of those you say were taken at Magdalen Islands 2—A. Yes, Q. If any of them were taken within three miles, state where ?—A. They were not. - Q. Well, this year you are in the Eliza Poor. As we have heard from her through others, I will not delay about that. - IBy Mr. Weatherbe: - Q. I didn’t take down the year you made two trips and got 273 bar- rels. What year was it 2–A. That was in 1872. Q. Where were you in 1870 and 1871 ?–A. In 1871. I was to work in Booth Bay in a factory. # AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2455 Q. In 1874 you were in the Alice º–A. Yes. Q. You are sure that was the year 7—A. Yes. Q. You left her. How many trips did you make 2–A. Only one trip. •I left her at Portland when she came home that trip. Q. Who was the master ?—A. Elbridge Love. Q. Had you any Nova Scotia fishermen in her ?—A. I don’t know that we did. I cannot say. We had all kinds, Spaniards, Portuguese, French. Q. Any from the provinces?—A. No; I don’t think we did. Q. None at all 7–A. No. Q. In some of these other years, did you have fishermen belonging to the provinces?—A. No; mostly from the State of Maine—from Belfast. Q. But this year, 1874, you had foreigners ?—A. Yes; we had mostly. Q. Not much accustomed to fishing 2—A. Poor fishermen generally. Q. How many tons was she 3—A. I think from 71 to 76 tons; 71, I am pretty Sure. e - Q. The previous vessel, what was her name 2—A. The Oak Grove ; that was 1868. i Q. In 1869%—A. I was in the James Jewett. Q. The next one, what was the name 2—A. That was in 1872—the Mary Louise. Q. Had you Spaniards and Portuguese that trip º–A. No ; mostly Americans. * Q. What was her tonnage?—A. I could not say exactly what the tonnage was. I think somewhere in the neighborhood of 70 or 75 tons. Q. You caught your mackerel four miles off?—A. Yes. Q. What proportion?—A. Half of them. I could not tell. Q. I suppose that would be the distance you would select as being good fishing?—A. Yes, sir. Q. That would be the best fishing you have 3–A. Yes, sir. Q. I suppose most of the fishermen fished that distance?—A. Yes; they generally fished off there, near four or five miles. Q. It is considered about the best fishing, four or five miles 2—A. Yes; it is. Q. I suppose in some places the fish would go in three and a half miles?—A. Yes, some fish do. Q. You Would not mind coming in three and a half miles if you were four miles out. I suppose sometimes they would manage to get in three miles 3–A. No vessels I have ever been in. Q. I am not speaking of the vessels, but the fish—is there anything to Stop them at four miles 3–A. No. - Q. There is no obstruction of any kind. Just as good water ?—A. Yes; only a little shallower. Q. Just as good feed 2–A. Yes. - Q. Perhaps better feed ?–A. Well, most generally the gales drive them off, but they come back again. Q. I suppose when the wind is a little off shore the best feed would be inside, closer in 2—A. Yes. Q. Closer inside than four miles?—A. I should say so. Q. They would then go in pretty close?—A. Yes. Q. You would then go in there and drift off?—A. Yes. Q. And the fleet would do that. We have evidence of that. The fleet Would run in as close as they could get and then drift off 2–A. Yes; that Was the way they fished. - Q. As close as they could get in 7–A. Not within four miles. Q. I was referring to a little closer. I wanted to coule in a little 2456 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. closer if I could. I was throwing a little bait'—A. Well, probably there might have been some fellows go in handier. Q. Some would go in nearer 7—A. Yes; some of the captains went in. Q. Let us make a compromise and say three miles and a half. You don't object to that, do you ? (No answer.) *… No. 46. CHARLES H. BRIER, of Belfast, Me., called on behalf of the Govern- ment of the United States, sworn and examined. s By Mr. Trescot: Question. You are a Belfast man 3–Answer. Yes. . When did you get here 3—A. Night before last. . You came in the Eliza Poor 7—A. Yes. . What brought her in 2—A. The storm. . How old are you ?—A. Twenty-five. . How long have you been fishing 3–A. Fifteen years. . When did you start 2—A. When I was ten years old. . What sort of fishing have you been doing 2—A. Mackerel-fishing. . Where ?—A. Four years in the bay and the rest on our coast. . What four years in the bay ?—A. '67, '68, '70, and '77. ... Well, the first year you went in what vessel ?—A. The Atlantic. Where from ?—A. Belfast. . Where did you go to fish 3—A. To the bay. . Whereabouts in the bay ?—A. From East Point to North Cape. . Did you make one or two trips ?—A. One. . EIow long was it 2–A. Two or three months. ... Well, don’t you recollect more particularly 3 Do you mean two or three ?—A. About three. Q. What did you catch 3–A. We caught mackerel. Q. What was the result of your fishing 2—A. 200 barrels. Q. Now, what proportion of these did you take within three miles 3– A. Of the 200 barrels we took 100 within three miles. Q. Then in 1868, what vessel were you in 2—A. The Rippling Wave. Q. Where were you that year 7–A. From North Cape to East Point and Escuminac. Q. How many trips ?—A. One. Q. What tonnage was she 3—A. Over 100 tons. Q. How long did your trip last 2—A. Three months. Q. What did you take 3–A. 250 barrels. - Q. Now, with regard to those 250 barrels, what proportion of them were taken within three miles 7–A. They were taken off shore mostly. Q. Where were you in 1870 ?—A. In the Eliza Poor. Q. Where were you that year 3–A. We went around the island to Escuminac, the West Shore. Q. Was that one or two trips ?—A. One trip. g Q. What did you take that year 2—A. About 200 barrels. We were there about three months. Q. Now what proportion of that catch was taken within three miles? —A. About one-half. * Q. Then in 1877 what vessel were you in 7–A. The Eliza Poor. Q. What did you do that year?—A. We got 110 barrels. Q. That is the same voyage you are coming in now?—A. Yes. Q. When did you go?—A. The 9th August. Q. When did you come out 7–A. About a week ago; we came out last Sunday. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2457 Q. You got 110 barrels. What proportion of those were taken within three miles?—A. About one-half. Q. Then only four years you have been in the bay ?—A. Yes. Q. The rest you have been on the coast; now, how does your fishing on the coast compare in point of success with the fishing in the gulf?— A. It is better on our coast the last ten years. Q. I am talking of the time you have been there?—A. Yes. * Is the fishing on the coast as expensive as in the gulf?—A. I don’t think. Q. In the fishing on the coast that you made, did you make long or Short trips ?–A. Short trips. Q. Do you recollect your last trip º–A. Yes; we got between 900 and 1,000. Q. In what time 2—A. Five months, I should think. Q. Well, you have been fishing fifteen years. As between fishing in the gulf and fishing in the bay, as a fishing industry, which is best ?— A. I should rather fish on the coast, a great deal. Q. Do you know anything about Prince Edward Island boat-fishing? —A. I have seen a good deal of it this year; we met the boats off the North Cape and East Point. - Q. How far did they come off?—A. A mile and a half to two and three miles. - By Mr. Doutre: Q. Since fishing on the American coast is so much better than in the bay, why do you go in the bay ?—A. Well, it failed this year; we had to go in the bay. Q. When it is better at home you remain there, and when it is better in the gulf you go there?—A. Yes. - Q. That is quite sensible. You say it is not so expensive fishing on the coast. Please explain why.—A. Well, it does not cost so much. I don’t know exactly. It is a good deal more expensive coming down to the bay than home. Q. Well, why? Is it because you have more hands, or that more provisions are eaten—that they have a better appetite in the bay than on the coast? What is it?—A. I don’t know. Q. You don’t fit on the American coast for three months because you may be only a week out 2—A. We fit for three or four weeks. Q. Very well, but you are not starting on such a long expedition as when you go to the bay. That is the reason you don’t fit out so com- pletely. Is it so?—A. We mostly always have to fit out once or twice in the bay. Q. Suppose you had to fit out for the same length of time on the American coast that you have in the gulf, would it cost much less?—A. No, about the same thing. Q. When you were in the Atlantic in 1867 where did she fish 7–A. In the bend of the island, from East Point to North Cape. Q. How far from the shore have you been fishing?—A. Fishing from ten to fifteen miles off most of the time. Q. Did you go near shore?—A. Right off Malpeque we ran in. - Q. When you were going in the harbors didn't you fish in the neigh- borhood around the island 2–A. We fished inshore part of the time. The great part of the time off shore, ten or fifteen miles, I should say. Q. Can you state now where you were longer fishing, whether it was out ten miles, as you say, or near the shore ?—A. Most of the time off Shore. 2458 AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. Q. What have you to remind you of that?—A. I think because it Would take quite a while to run inshore when we wanted to. Q. What do you call inshore ?—A. Two or three miles off. Q. Can you find out easily whether you are three miles or four miles Or five miles off 2–A.. I don’t know how we can. Q. Suppose you were about five or four miles, would you call that off shore or inshore ?—A. I would call it inshore. Q. Then, what leads you to say you caught about half your trip inshore and half out?—A. Because we did, I suppose. We had a license to fish inshore, and we fished there. Q. You were not afraid of going in there; so long as you found fish you fished there 3—A. Yes. Q. Well, you had no reason whatever, had you, to take a note of the Quantity taken inshore or outshore—what reminds you now of the fact?— A. I don’t know anything to remind me, only that we fished about half the time off shore, and caught about as many fishing off shore as in. Q. In your second trip did you follow about the same spots as in the first trip 7–A. We went to North Cape, Escuminac, and West Shore. Q. How far from shore ?—A. Sometimes we would be in sight of land and Sometimes off shore. Q. Well, if you were called upon to state what proportion you caught inshore and what proportion off shore ?—A. We caught them mostly off shore. Q. Well, that is not very definite %–A. We might have got 50 of the 250 barrels inshore. * Q. Not more than that ? In the Eliza Poor you got more inshore than that ?—A. Yes. Q. Both years?—A. Yes. Q. The mackerel that you caught on the Amercan coast—did you salt it, or was it sold fresh 7–A. It was salted. Q. How many trips did you make during the five months?—A. We carried about 250 barrels a trip—from 50 to 250. The largest trips were 250. - Q. Since 1870 you have not fished on the American coast. What use did you make of the time during these years?—A.. I worked on shore part of the time, and part of the time I fished. Q. From 1870 to 1877 you did not fish at all ?—A. 1877 ? Q. The last time you came in the bay was 1870 ?—A. Well, I fished On Our COaSt. Q. During that interval 7–A. Yes. Q. Did you fish last year 7–A. Yes. Q. What was your catch 2–A. 900 or 1,000 barrels. Q. What distance from the coast generally is the mackerel taken on the American shore ?—A. Mostly off shore. Q. For the last year or two 4–A. The most of our fish are abroad off. No. 47. DEXTER F. WALSH, of Belfast, Me., fisherman, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. IBy Mr. Foster: - Question. You live at Portland 2–Answer. No, at Belfast. Q. You were in the Eliza Poor”—A. Yes. Q. What was the first year you were ever mackereling in the Gulf of St. Lawrence”—A. 1867. AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 2459 Q. How many barrels did you take 3–A. 300. Q. Where?—A. At Magdalens. * Q. Anywhere else?—A.. We caught about all there, I think. Q. Take 1869, what vessel were you in 2—A. In the Morning Star, Captain Moore. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you take 7–A, Ithink we took, in 1869, 240 barrels in two trips. Q. How long were you here 7–A. About four months in the bay. Q. Where were these taken 3–A. At the Magdalens mostly. Q. Where else?—A. I don’t remember fishing anywhere else—West Shore and Prince Edward Island. Q. In 1876 you were in the gulf again 3–A. No. Q. Were you not in the gulf last year 7—A. Yes. Q. In what schooner?—A. The Alice M. Gould. Q. How long were you here 3—A. Four months, two trips——one for Cod and one for mackerel. Q. How long were you in the gulf mackereling ?–A. Two months. Q. How many men have you had 7–A. 14 mackereling. Q. How many barrels have you got ?—A. 40. Q. In two months?—A. Yes. • Q. Where were these taken 3–A. At Port Hood, Cape George, and East Point. - Q. I need not ask you whether you made any money last year 7—A. I was cook and made $50 a month. Q. But from catches was any money made 2—A. No. The crew came home in debt. b Q. Not only the vessel but the crew 2–A. The vessel and the crew Oth. Q. This year you have been in the Eliza Poor”—A. Since the 4th of August. Q. We have had an account of the trip; I think I won’t go over that again. By Mr. Davies: Q. Were you master of these vessels?—A. No. Q. You were in the Morning Star in 1869. Who was her captain then 3–A. George Moore. A Q. When you were there this year how many barrels did you take 3– . 120. Q. Where were you fishing 2—A. Around the west shore of Prince Edward Island, and Escuminac, some around East Point. Q. Every year there are more or less got there?—A. Yes. d º The first year, '67, you were not there at all?—A. No; at the Mag- all tº IłS. Q. And since that you have been generally fishing those grounds 2— A. Yes. The second year we fished mostly at the Magdalens. Q. The last year you have been fishing over this ground 3–A. Yes. I haven't been at the Magdalens this year at all. - Q. When ; '76?–A. No ; I was not there last year. |. Why didn’t you go there last year and this year?—A. I don’t know Wny. Q. The fleet was fishing around East Point and Port Hood º–A. We had news from the Magdalens that they were not doing anything there, I Suppose. We generally know what is going on all round the bay. Q. You got a very small catch last year?—A. Yes. Q. That was not the average 3—A. Yes, I think it was. 2460 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What time did you go in ?—A. We went in, I think, some time about the 15th of August. Q. You missed the best catches of the year?—A. We were cod-fishing when the best mackereling was going on. All the vessels did poorly anyway. Only a few vessels got a trip. # Q. In '69 you were off the island too?—A. Yes. Q. Did you catch many off the island shore ?—A. No. We got most of our trip off the Magdalens. -- Q. How far off the island did the boats fish 7–A. Four or five miles. Q. The last witness said half a mile to a mile and a half or two miles? —A. They fished all distances. Q. Why did you say four miles, then } Have you seen them over a mile or two or three miles?—A. Yes. Q. IS not that generally the distance they fish 7–A. I could not Say. Q. Why ; haven’t you been sufficiently long 3–A. I have seen them fishing inside and outside of three miles. - Q. Haven’t you been there sufficiently long this season and last season to see ?—A. I should say the boats we saw this year were fishing three miles off. Q. But you got your fish inside 3—A. Some of them. Q. The boats were outside of you?—A. Sometimes they were. * Q. How far would you be off when the boats would be outside of you? —A. Perhaps a mile. - Q. Then they might be outside of you and still be well within three miles?—A. Yes. Q. You give it as your evidence that most of the time the boats were four miles from land; and when you say that you caught none within three miles, you mean that you caught them at the same distance as the boats?—A. Some of them fished four miles off and some further. Q. The bulk I mean ; do you mean that ?–A. Yes; they fished four Or five miles off. . y: Do you know Charles H. Brien, who was examined here ?—A. 6S. Q. He stated that the boats fished from half a mile to a mile or two. Did he tell the truth or not ?—A. I have seen them as near as that. Q. You don't agree with him 7–A. Yes, I do. No. 48. LAWRENCE LONDRIGAN, of St. Mary’s Bay, Newfoundland, fisher- man, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. by Mr. Foster: Question. You were born in Newfoundland 3–Answer. Yes. Q. How long have you been away from there ?—A. Three years this Coming fall. Q. How old are you ?—A. Twenty-eight or twenty-nine years last fall. Q. What did you do the first year you left Newfoundland 2–A. The first year I was in America. I trawled on the coast of Maine. Q. What schooner 3–A. Liberator. * - Q. From what port did she sail 3–A. Westport, Me. - Q. You went trawling for what ?—A. Codfish and hake principally. Q. Whereabouts did you trawl?—A. Off the coast of Maine and along Seal Island Bay. Q. You made short trips?—A. Yes. Q- Were you getting fish to salt 3—A. To sell green. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 24.61 Q. To be salted 3–A. We salted them ourselves. Q. What bait did you use 7–A. The first summer we used clams and afterwards pogies and menhaden. - Q. Salted 2–A. The clams were salted, but the pogies were kept in 1C0. Q. Not sliver ?—A. We iced them ourselves. Q. What were you doing last year 7—A. I was mackereling last Sum- Iſle I’. Q. In what vessel ?—A. Lizzie Poore. Q. On the United States coast 7–Yes. * - Q. What were you doing last winter 2—A. I left to go in a vessel for frozen herring last December. Q. What is the name of the vessel ?—A. J. W. Roberts. Q. Where did she hail from ?—A. Rockport, Me. Q. Who was her captain 3–A. P. Conley. Q. When did she start from Rockport 3–A. 26th December. Q. How long were you gone?—A. We were at Beaver Harbor and round Grand Manan about two weeks. Q. Were other vessels there 3—A. Yes. Q. How many ?—A. Electric Flash, Madawaska Maid, Mary Turner, Episcatawa. - Q. How many frozen herring did you get 2—A. 300,000. Q. Where did you obtain them 3–A. Some were bought frozen and Some We bought green and took ashore, and some we froze on the deck Of the vessel. - - Q. What did you pay for them 2–A. For most of them fifty cents a hundred; for about 25,000, forty five cents a hundred. - Q. Did you catch any yourselves?—A. No, we had no means of catch- Ing any. - - Q. You purchased them for money 2—A. Yes, for money. Q. This summer you have been in the Lizzie Poore ?—A. Yes. Q. Have you any idea what your share is going to be 3—A. No, I have not the slightest. d By Mr. Davies: Q. The fish you bought down at Grand Manan were frozen partly on deck and partly on shore ?—A. Yes, and some were bought frozen. Q. Those you bought in a green state you landed?—A. Some of them. Q. And froze them there yourselves, and then transferred them to the Vessel ?—A. Yes. - No. 49. TICHARD HOPKINs, of Belfast, Me., fisherman, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Tresóot : Question. How old are you ?—Answer. Sixty-three years. Q. Where do you live 3–A. At Belfast. Q. Were you born there ?—A. No, at Winehaven. Q. How far is that from Belfast 2—A. Thirty-five miles. Q. How many years have you been fishing ?—A. Forty years. Q. What vessel are you now in 7–A. Esperanza. Q. When did she come here ?—A. On Wednesday, I think. Q. Who is captain of the vessel ?—A. Captain Smalley. Q. She came from the gulf. How long have you been there ?—A. About five weeks. 2462 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What sort of a caten have you had 3–A. A small catch. Q. How many barrels 2–A. One hundred and ten barrels. Ten hands. Q. What is the tonnage of the vessel ?—A. Forty-four tons. - Q. Where did you fish during that trip 7—A. We fished mostly up to the north part of Prince Edward Island. Q. When you say you fished to the north part of the island, did you do much fishing within three miles of the coast 2—A. Not much within three miles. . . Q. What portion of the 110 barrels did you catch within three miles of the shore ?—A. I should say about three-quarters off shore. Q. And about one-quarter inshore ?—A. About one-quarter inshore. What I call inshore is two or three miles off. Q. Do you think you gave a fair trial to the inshore fishery? Did you fish enough inshore to test the inshore fishery 3—A. Yes. We went in to see if there were fish there. \ Q. During the forty years you have been fishing, have you been fish- ing for mackerel or for cod, or for both 3–A. A little at both. . Q. Have you been cod-fishing and then mackerel-fishing, or doing both together ?—A. I have been employed in the fishing business most part of the time. Q. Of the forty years you have been fishing, how many years were you in the gulf?—A.. I think twenty-five seasons. Q. Do you find fishing in the bay to-day what it used to be in old times 3–A. No. - Q. What is the difference 2—A. Mackerel are not so plentiful as they used to be. * - Q. Of the twenty-five years you have fished there, what proportion of your fish did you catch outside, and what proportion within three miles of the shore?—A. I never saw a large deck of fish, during the time I was there, caught very near the shore. They were mostly small decks. The best fishing I have seen was on what we call Bank Bradley. Q. That has been during the whole of the time you have been fish- ing 2—A. Yes. I should say that nearly three-fourths of the fish I have taken in the bay have been taken off shore, 8, 15, 25, and 30 miles off. Q. During those forty years have you done much fishing on the United States coast 2—A. Yes; I have fished a good deal in the States during that time. - Q. Do you mean the coast of Maine, or clear down where the magk- erel go 3–A. The coast of Maine. Q. You have not done much fishing on the shore from Cape Cod to Æ[atteras?—A. No. . Q. Or off on the Georges?—A. No. . Q. You could not really compare the coast-fishing with the bay-fishing, from what you have seen of it'—A. No. Q. You don’t know much of the United States coast-fishing 3–A. No. Q. When you did fish off that coast, was it with seine or hand line & 1–A. Hand line. - - Q. Then you don’t know anything about seine fishing, which has come in of late years?—A. I have not been seining. Q. With regard to your fishing in the bay. What did you find to be the best fishing-ground in the bay, during the forty years you have tried there 3—A.. I think I have caught most fish at Magdalen Islands. Q. Are the Magdalen Islands a tolerably safe place 7–A. I consider them about as safe as any part of the bay where you get mackerel. Q. As safe as the Bend of Prince Edward Island 7–A. Yes; Safer. Q. Why Ž—A. The Bend of Prince Edward Island is not a very safe AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2463 place to fish unless you are well acquainted with the harbors, which are hard to get into in a storm. Q. Do you know anything about the shore boat-fishing at Prince Ed- ward Island 7–A. No ; I don’t know more about it than that I have seen them off fishing a great many times in going up and down the shore. Q. How far off did you meet the small boats?—A. One, two, three, or four miles off. By Mr. Davies: Q. You have been fishing a good many years, and you seem to have preferred the gulf fishing to that on the American coast 3–A.. I have been in the gulf eighteen seasons mackereling. Q. I thought you said twenty-five seasons?—A. I was eighteen sea- sons mackereling, and the balance fishing for codfish. Q. Have you fished in Bay Chaleurs proper ?—A. Yes; I have been in Chaleurs Bay. Q. Some of the witnesses have spoken of Chaleurs Bay as a pretty good fishing-ground; would you state it to be a pretty fair fishing- ground?—A. Well, I don’t think it is a very good place to fish in. I never fished as much there as below; not half as much. Q. What is the matter with it 2–A. We never could find mackerel the same as in other places. Q. Did you try it of late years or further back?—A. I have not fished there much within ten years. Q. Previous to that you fished there 7—A. Yes, more. Q. Every year more or less 2—A. Yes. Q. When you were in Chaleurs Bay and found poor fishing, did you go far up 3—A. Not a great way up; not more than 10 or 15 miles up the bay. Q. What are the boundaries of Chaleurs Bay—from Miscou Point to . Port Daniel ?—A. Yes. Q. When you have been fishing there, did you ever go along the shores 3–A. Yes, we followed along the shores on both sides. Q. The fleet used to fish there?—A. Yes, on both sides; but not very handy in to those shores, for we never could find fish very handy in to those shores. - Q. The center of the bay is as good fishing ground as the sides 7–A. The center of the bay is fully better. Q. Your fish were caught mostly in the center of the bay, I suppose ? —A. Yes, mostly down at the mouth of the bay. r Q. You have not followed up the bay at all ?— A. No. -- Q. Perhaps you never went up at all 3–A. Yes, I have gone up as far as Paspebiac. & Q. How many times º–A. Eight or ten times. Q. Was the fleet accustomed to fish down at the mouth of the bay or to go up 7–A. During the latter part of the season they fish below. Q. What do you mean 2–A. I never was there fishing in the fore part of the season. - - Q. Then you don’t know?—A. Not for the first part of the season. The latter part of the season they fish below. - Q. Do you know whether any bait which the fish follow is to be found round the shores—brit, for instance 2—A. Yes, I have seen them in the water frequently. * Q. Where do you find them 2–A. You see them on the fishing ground. Q. I mean in the bay. Do you find them in round that shores 2—A. I never took notice whether they were about in that bay much. Prob- ably I have seen them. I don’t recollect about it now. 2464 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Leaving Bay Chaleurs, have you fished along the west coast of New Brunswick 3–A. Not much. * - Q. We have had evidence that some of the fleet fished there. Was your vessel among them 3–A. A good many vessels go where I don’t see them during the time they are in the bay. Q. Did you go further north than Bay Chaleurs—to Bonaventure and up round the River St. Lawrence 2—A. I have been at Bonaventure several times. Q. Have you been up at Seven Islands 2—A. No. Q. You never fished at Seven Islands?—A. No ; I have never been there. Q. Have you been master of a vessel ?—A. I have been pilot and master of a vessel in fibe bay six times only. Q. Have you been along the shore of River St. Lawrence?—A. Not much. - Q. That part of the fisheries you don't know about 2—A. I do not. Q. Whether the fish are taken inshore or out you cannot say, not having been there?—A. I have been round Anticosti fishing; we never did much there. Q. Fishing for mackerel round Anticosti ?—A. Mackereling. I never did much there. * Q. Coming down to Cape Breton; you have been at Margaree, of course 3—A. Yes. Q. At what time of year did you generally go to fish there ?—A. In the fall. Q. Is there any particular time when fishermen run to Margaree ?— A. At the last of August and September. Q. Is Sydney one of the places you went to?—A. I never fished there. Q. Have you fished off Port EIood 7–A. I have. Q. And from Cheticamp down to Margaree ?—A. Yes. Q. You have also fished at Prince Edward Island”—A. Yes. Q. What parts of the island do you prefer ?—A. At East Point, and between that and the Chapels. Q. Between the two Chapels is good fishing ground 3–A. Yes. We found Some there this season. Q. The fleet generally go there more or less?—A.. I have seen small fleets there, never a large fleet. Q. Have you been in any of the harbors along Prince Edward Island? —A. Yes. Q. Have you fished off Rustico and Malpeque?—A. Not much off Rustico, some off Malpeque. Q. And off Cascumpeque?—A. Very little. Q. Off North Cape 3—A. Yes. Q. Off Miminegash 7–A. Yes. - a Q. You took fish more or less at the different places where you went 3–A. Yes. Q. Is Margaree considered by fishermen to be very good fishing ground 3–A. It has not been very good of late years. 1% Was it formerly so considered ?–A. I have seen good fishing there. Q. I believe the fishing grounds are changing. For instance, this year you have not been to Bank Bradley 7–A. No. . Q. Why did you not go there ?—A. We had heard from there. Q. That nothing was to be had there ?—A. I have not heard of any- thing being taken there. g AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2465 Q. The same with Bank Orphan. You have not been there this. year?—A. No. Q. Have you been at the Magdalen Islands?—A. In sight of them. Q. You did not catch anything there?—A. No. Q. So the fish are not now so much at the old places where you used. to find them 20 years ago?—A. No. * Q. In what direction is the change tending 2 Are the fish nearer the shore than they used to be years ago?—A. I don't think any nearer than they used to be—not the body of the fish. Q. This year about one-half of your catch was taken near the shore?– A. We did not get but very few of ours inshore this season. Q. Did the fleet use purse-seines in deep water ?—A. I did not See as Seine hove in the bay. Q. Why don’t they use purse-seines in deep water if the fish are: there?–A. I don't know. They don’t very often heave them till they see the mackerel when Schooling. Q. Did you see any mackerel schooling there in deep water ?–A. I. did not. Q. And therefore you did not throw your purse-Seine?—A. We did not have a seine to throw. We had hand lines. Q. What character are the fish you have got ? What qualities—No. 1, No. 2, or No. 3?–A. I should say they would go by the cull here about one-half 2's and one-half 1’s. Q. Is that what you call a fair average for the catch 3–A. Yes. Q. Is it better than the average catch as regards quality º–A. The Quality is not so good. I have been here a great many falls when three- Quarters would be 1's. - Q. Would I be correct in assuming that of the fish caught by your vessels in the bay three-quarters are 1's 3–A. Not this season. Q. Generally 7–A. Yes, as a general thing they used to be so in the fall, say from 1st August up to to 20th October. - Q. About three-quarters 1’s and the others 2's 3–A. Yes, that used to be about the average. Q. I suppose you left the bay on account of the storm of the 22d 2– A. There have been no fish caught since then. Q. Did the storm cause you to leave 7—A. We left because there was no mackerel. Q. Before the Storm came on the mackerel were there 7–A. The mackerel were going—pretty well thinning out, I suppose, by the appear- ance of things. Q. After the storm of the 22d they disappeared 7–A. I saw none after the Storm. Q. Is it not customary for mackerel to disappear after a storm 3–A. Not in all cases. It was getting late for them. Q. I have heard it stated that When a storm comes on the mackerel generally disappear, and you don’t see them for some days'—A. That is a common thing. Q. You saw mackerel before the storm of the 22d 3—A. Yes. Q. They were not seen afterwards?—A. The day before the storm I saw mackerel and caught some. Q. Did you see any afterwards 2—A. No. Q. So that it always, or very nearly always, happens that after a heavy storm you do not see mackerel for some days, do you ?—A. No ; but after a week's time you should see them if they are there. Q. They return after a week's time?—A. Yes. Q. Is there any difficulty in ascertaining the distance from the land 3 155 F 24.66 . , Aw ARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. For instance, if you were out 2, 3, or 4 miles would there be any diffi- “culty in telling the distance from the shore ?—A. Well, no, not much 'difficulty about telling it. Q. You think there would be no difficulty in telling whether you were two, three, or four miles off?—A. You can tell when you are out ten miles from land. When you are off ten miles Prince Edward Island, it looks low. Q. Is there any difficulty when you are two, three, or four miles off, in ascertaining where you are exactly?—A. When you get the opinion of four or five men you can judge within a mile or half a mile. Q. You think it would require the opinions of four or five men?—A. To see how they agree on it. Some might say they were four or five miles out, when they were not more than two miles from shore. Q. They might think they were four or five miles out when they were only two 3–A. Yes. Q. One witness told us that a great many fish were taken four miles from land, and that there was good fishing-ground four miles out; is that a fact º–A. Who was it said so * & Q. A witness who was examined here to-day. What do you think of the statement that there is a very good fishing-ground just four miles out 3–A. There might be, but I don’t know where it is. Q. You have been many years on the American coast 3–A. Yes. Q. Fishing mackerel ?—A. Yes. * Q. How many miles from the coast did you as a general rule take your mackerel ?—A. I have been out 60 miles. Q. IS that the general distance?—A. No. º What is the general distance?—A. Probably from 15 to 20 miles OII. Q. Are there many traps and pounds along the coast for catching mackerel ?—A. No. Q. You don’t know about those, for you have not fished along the shores?—A.. I never fished along the shore much. Q. You have never been employed in connection with traps and pounds 2—A. No. * Q. º you know if much mackerel is caught in the traps and pounds? —A. N.O. Q. What years were you fishing on the American coast 2—A. I was there a year ago this fall. - f § What other years 2—A. I was fishing there three years ago this fall, - Q. Five years ago, were you there then 2–A. Yes. Q. Was the fishing you had then pretty good º–A. Yes, very good. Q. Has it been increasing or diminishing?—A. It has increased. Q. Within what time?—A. Up to one year ago. This season it has been nothing scarcely. Q. Nothing at all?—A. There has been some fishing. Q. Were 1875 and 1876 very good years ?—A. Yes. Q. How were 1870 and 1871?—A. The fishing was fair. Q. What do you call fair 3–A. It was just about an average of the fast fifteen years. Q. Have you noticed any decrease in fishing on that coast within the Bast ten years º–A. Some seasons the fishing was not as good, but imackerel have been there during that time. Q. The mackerel have not been taken, but may have been in the Water 7—A. Yes. } AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 24.67 Q. When you were in Bay St. Lawrence were you in the same vessel all the time 3–A. No, different vessels. e Q. What vessels were you in 2—A. It would take me some time to re- member all the names. There were Castlemaine, S. S. Lewis, City Bllee, Bloomer, Clara, Lapwing, Forest Queen, Oak Grove. Q. What year were you in the Forest Queen 3–A. I think it was 1854. Q. You were not in her in 1864, were you ?—A. No. Q. What year were you in the Oak Grove 3—A. The first year of the War, I think. *. Q. That would be 1861?--A. Yes. Q. Who was the captain 3–A. Captain BurgeSS. Q. Any other vessel ?—A. Circassian. Q. What catch did you take in the Oak Grove 4–A. About 160 bar- rels, I think. I know it was a small trip. - Q. Were you in the bay in 1867 and 1868?–A. I was there in 1868. Q. Had your vessel a license º–A. No. Q. What was her name 2—A. I think her name was the same as the Vessel I am now in—Esperanza. Q. Then you had no license when in the gulf any of those years 2– A. No. Q. How do you know that the vessels had no license 2–A. The crew had always to pay part of the license fee, and I do not pay any. Q. Do you attach much importance to the bay fishing & Do you value it much as a privilege 3—A. It has not been much of a privilege to me for the two or three last trips I have made there. Q. Speaking generally as a fisherman of the United States, do you think the right to go down to the bay to fish is of much value 3–A. It does not seem to be much of late years. g Q. I don’t mean to limit you to this year or last year, but I mean the right of fishing generally ?—A. For the last four years there have been but very few American vessels fishing in the bay. Q. Do you look upon it as a valuable fishing-ground; you seem to have devoted most of your life to it in preference to anything else apparently 3–A. People have a great many minds about that. They might think it valuable when they started to go there, and afterwards think it is not. - Q. What is the general opinion among fishermen—that it is valuable or not ?—A. They think it has not been very valuable lately. I used to think it was valuable once. Q. The catches were very large at one time 2—A. Pretty good some SeaSOIl S. Q. The years the catches were large you considered it valuable, and the years the catches were small you did not consider it valuable %—A. Yes. When there was good fishing, and the fish fetched fair prices, it was a valuable fishery. Q. Do you think the privilege of going to the bay is one of any value? —A. It has not been so for the last three or four years, but before that I think a man would do as well there as going anywhere fishing. By Mr. Trescot: Q. Mr. Davies has been very anxious to know what you think of the value of the privilege of fishing in the bay. Do you think it would be worth while for the government and people of the United States to pay one million dollars a year for the privilege of fishing in it 2–A. No, I do not. 2468 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Mr. Davies asked you if you had this year seen any of the fish schooling out off shore, and you told him no. Have you seen any mack- erel schooling inshore?—A. I did not see a School of mackerel while I was there. - Q. Either inshore or out 3—A. No. Q. Have you seen any of the horse mackerel this year in the bay ?— A. No. Q. Mr. Davies asked you also about fishing along the coast of Prince Edward Island, and you spoke of fishing about East Point back and forth. How far off did you fish, as a rule, when you fished at the island? —A. This season 3 Q. Yes.—A. All the way from six to eight and ten miles. Q. Mr. Davies asked you why you had not been to Banks Bradley and Orphan this year, and you said there were no fish there. Did you mean to say that the fishing at Banks Bradley and Orphan has fallen off, as a general rule, or only this year 7—A. I was not there, but I un- derstood there was not anything there. I learned that by other vessels. Q. This year 3–A. At that time. - Q. You told Mr. Davies you thought in old times that about three- fourths of the mackerel caught in the bay used to be No. 1's—how far back do you mean 2 Do you refer to this year, last year, or year before, or a good while back 3–A. A good while back. Q. How many years back 7–A. Twenty or thirty. Q. You were also asked whether you left the bay on account of the storm, and you said no º–A. We did not leave on account of the St0rm. Q. Then you were asked whether, as a rule, mackerel did not disappear, when a storm came up, for a week, and were not to be found ; had you found any mackerel just before the storm 3–A. Yes; I caught some the day before. Q. Anything like a large catch 3—A. No ; a very small one. Q. Now, with regard to the difficulty of measuring distances. What do you think would be the value of a man’s opinion who stood on shore and said a vessel was three miles or three miles and a half off?—A. He would not have so good a chance to be right as if he was standing on a vessel and looking at the shore. Q. It is in all cases a very uncertain sort of calculation ?—A. Yes; when the land is high it is more deceiving. Q. Have you not found yourself deceived very often in the measure- ment of distances 3–A. Yes. Q. What do you think would be the value of a man’s judgment in stating that he stood on shore and saw a fleet of 200, 300, 400, or 500 vessels fishing within three miles of land 3–A. It would not amount to much. Dy Mr. Davies: Q. Did you understand what Mr. Trescot said to you ?—A. He asked me what I thought the judgment of a man would be worth about the distance of a fleet of vessels off from the shore; it would be uncer- tain whether they would be within three miles or two miles. Q. What was the first year you came to the bay ?—A. I think 1827 I did not go after mackerel, but codfish. - Q. What was the first year you were in the bay for mackerel ?—A. In 1835, I think. - - Q. Were the mackerel better then than in 1845 or 1855?—A. No. Q. Not so good 7–A. I don’t think they were. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2469 Q. They were better about 1860?–A. Yes; somewhere about then. Q. And from that down to 1865 or 1870?–A. Yes; and since that time not as good. Q. Those are the years they were better 2—A. Yes. By Mr. Trescot: - Q. Suppose a fleet of 200 or 250 vessels were fishing off shore, what Space would be covered?—A. Sometimes when they are snugly together, they don't cover a very large body of water; and you can scatter them OVer a large surface. It depends on how snugly they are together. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : - Q. The first year you went into the bay cod-fishing, had you heard of mackerel-fishing there?—A. No. There was hardly a vessel from the States in the bay then. Q. Had you heard of mackerel-fishing there; had it begun then?—A. No ; there was not much caught at that time. By Mr. Foster: * Q. What year were you first in the bay for mackerel ?—A. In 1835. In 1827 there was nothing doing in mackerel-fishing. No. 50. GEORGE O. CLARK, of Belfast, Me., fisherman, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster: Question. You are one of the sharesmen of the Lizzie Poore?—Answer. Yes. Q. How many years before that had you been in the gulf fishing 2– A. Seven or eight years. Q. What was the last year before this summer you were there ?—A. 1870. - Q. In what schooner º–A. Banner, of Belfast, Captain McFarlane. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you catch 7–A. About 160 or 165. Q. And where were they taken 7–A. Mostly round North Cape and the Bend of Prince Edward Island. Q. What portion, if any, was taken within three miles of the shore ?— A. 15 or 20 barrels. Q. Where were those taken 2–A. They were not taken a great way inside of three miles; about three miles off Kildare, this side of North Cape. t Q. Were you in the bay in 1869%—A. No. Q. In 1868?–A. Yes. Q. In what schooner?—A. Charles E. Moody, Frankford, Capt. Thos. Clark. Q. How many barrels did she take 3—A. About 200 barrels. Q. Where were they taken 3–A. Off Bonaventure, broad off. Q. Were any of them taken within three miles of the shore ?—A. No. Q. Were you in the bay in 1867 ?–A. Yes. Q. In what schooner 3–A. Mary Lowe, of Gloucester, Captain Adams. Q. How many barrels did you take 3–A. About 250, I think. Q. Where were those taken 3–A. At Magdalen Islands, East Point, Margaree, and Cape North. - Q. If you took any of them inshore, state where you took them and 2470 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. how many 3–A. We got about 50 barrels at East Point, from 3 to 8 miles out ; about the same number at the Magdalen Islands. From East Point to Port EHood we got a few going across, and from there down to Cape North we got the rest of the catch, about 150 barrels. Q. Do you say you were at Margaree ?—A. Yes. Q. How near the shore did you take mackerel there?—A. About three miles off. Q. Three miles from the mainland or the island 2–A. From the island. - ... Were you in the bay in 1866%—A. Yes. t In what schooner 7–Atlantic, of Bedford, Captain Coombs. . How many barrels did you catch 3–A. About 60 barrels. Where did you get them 2–A. At the Magdalen Islands. How long were you in the bay ?—A. About six weeks. . What was your earliest trip to the bay ?—A. In 1858. !. How many times between 1858 and 1866 were you in the bay ?—A. Three times. . - Q. When were you next there before 1866 %–A. In 1860. Q. In what schooner º–A. A begail, Captain Dunbar. We were fish- ing for both cod and mackerel. Q. On the same trip 7–A. Yes. Q. How long were you in the gulf that year 7—A. About three months. Q. Do you remember what you took 7–A. 20 quintals of cod and 4 or 5 barrels of mackerel. We were not really catching mackerel. We fitted out for codfish. < * Q. What bait had you ?—A. We caught mackerel for bait. Q. Where did you fish for cod?—A. Away up Madeleine River. Q. Were you in the bay in 1859%—A. Yes; In President, of Belfast, Capt. Conway. Q. Were you fishing for mackerel ?—A. For codfish and mackerel. Q. How much mackerel and how much codfish did you take 3–A. I guess about 150 quintals of codfish and about 150 barrels of mackerel. Q. Where did you take the mackerel ?—A. Off Bonaventure. Q. Within what distance of the shore ?–A. Justin, right off the hills. Q. In 1858 what schooner were you in 2—A. Columbia, of Belfast, Capt. McFarlane. Q. Fishing for mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. What did you get?—A. I believe we got about 200 barrels. Q. How old were you then 3–A. 12 years. * Q. Do you remember what was your fishing ground 2–A. Off North Cape and the Bend of Prince Edward Island. Q. How near the shore at the bend of the island %–A.. I should think about 3 or 4 miles out. By Mr. Davies: Q. Did you ever fish in Bay Chaleurs ?—A. We have been into Ship- pegan for a harbor. Q. You never fished up in the bay ?–A. Not up in there. Q. Then you know nothing about the fishing there 3—A. No. Q. Have you ever heard of the fleet going there to fish 3–A. I believe they have been there. Q. Have you ever fished at Seven Islands?—A. No, I don’t know where they are. º Q. Nor up St. Lawrence River ?–A. I have been away up there fish- Ing. i AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 247 i. Q. Fishing for mackerel?—A. For cod and mackerel. - Q. How far from the shore did you catch the mackerel there ?–A. We caught them inshore. We caught them for bait. 2 Q. How far out 2—A. One mile. Q. When you were down at Cape Breton and Margaree, how far were you off from the island 3–A. From 4 to 10 miles. Q. You told Mr. Foster from three to ten ?—A. He did not ask me anything about Cape Breton. He asked me the distance from Marga- ree Island. Q. Then you were four miles from Cape Breton, and three miles from Margaree?—A. Yes. Q. Could you tell the distance exactly or accurately 2—A. No, I could not tell exactly, ... " Q. You had no reason for giving any special attention to it?—A. No. Q. You may have been two miles or four miles out 7—A. I might have been two miles and I might have been five. - Q. I suppose special attention is not given to the exact distance you are off shore. You don’t pretend to measure ?—A. No. Q. When you spoke of off shore and inshore generally, it may have been two or four miles, you cannot tell?—A. Yes. Q: You have been round Prince Edward Island 2–A. Yes. Q. And fished in the same way there, from two to five miles out, off and On 3—A. Yes, from three to five miles and eight miles, according to how the weather was. Q. If the fish had been plentiful would you have gone in 2—A. I sup- pose we would if fish had been plentiful. Q. At what distance out do the boats fish—two or three miles?—A. From one mile to three or four miles. Q. I suppose you would be often fishing in among the boats?—A. No, We hardly ever went in among the boats. Q. You never fished much about Rustico 3–A. No, we never fished round at Rustico. Q. At what parts of the island did you fish 7–A. Off East Point, Georgetown, up at the Two Chapels, off New London, Malpeque, Cas- Cumpeque, Kildare, North Cape, and from there to West Cape. Q. All round the shores of the island?—A. Yes. Q. Where were you the year you got 60 barrels in the Atlantic?—A. Mostly over at the Magdalen Islands. - Q. Had you a license that year to fish 7–A. No. Q. You did not try anywhere else?—A. We fished a little off Cape George. * Q. That trip appears to have been a great failure?—A. Yes. NO. 42. f \ MONDAY, Octobºr 8, 1877. The Conference met. Examination of ROBERT H. HULBERT, callel on behalf of the Gov. ernment of the United States, resumed. By Mr Foster: Question. When your examination ended on Friday, I was inquiring of you as to the fishery on the coast of Maine in the neighborhood of Mount Desert. Over how large a territory on the coast of Maine does the mackerel fishery extend, and how long does it last there ?—Answer. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 90 miles, and perhaps more than that. I could not say for certain, for I never remember distances or courses. 24.72 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Ninety miles from what ?—A. Ninety miles along the coast. Q. Along about where?—A. Portland principally, and from there to Mount Desert. Q. How many months does it last 7–A. The principal part of that fishing is from July 1 to August 25. Q. How far out to sea does it extend ?–A. Somewhere in the neigh- borhood of sixty miles. - - Q. Could you give a general idea of what portion of all the mackerel that go into the markets of Maine and Massachusetts, and are inspected, are caught between Mount Desert and Block Island, including the Banks, offshore ?—A. Probably, seven-eighths of all the mackerel in- Spected. \ - Q. Do you include in that the mackerel which come from Bay St. Lawrence 2—A. No ; (nly those that are caught on the United States COaSt. Q. Then, on our coast, the fishing for mackerel does not go much farther north than Mount Desert?—A. Nothing of any consequence. Probably there are some mackerel go north of that, but very few of our Vessels go after it. Q. About what season of the year, along from Mount Desert to Mas- Sachusetts coast, is the fishing at its height 7–A. In July and August. Q. When do the vessels that fish on the United States coast begin to go South again 3—A. The last of September, the 25th September gen- erally ; it depends a great deal on the weather. Q. And how far south do they go 7–A. We don’t follow those mack- erel that go on the coast of Maine farther than the mouth of Vineyard Sound; that is near Chatham. Q. On the north side of Cape Cod?—A. Yes. Q. And how late do you fish for them off in the vicinity of Chatham & —A. We fish there only a few days, because after the mackerel, com- mence to go down from there they go very fast; unless the weather is Very fine we cannot fish at all for them. Q. What is the latest season of the year when mackerel are fished on the United States coast 3–A. Nothing of any account is done after the 15th November. Q. Where are the mackerel fished so late as that ?—A. Sometimes at Block Island, and sometimes in the vicinity of Massachusetts Bay. Q. Do not your fishermen go farther south than Block Island in autumn, to any extent 3–A. No. Q. What is the quality of the mackerel taken in autumn 2—A. They are generally fat, but they begin to decrease after the last of October. Q. Within what period are the best mackerel taken off Maine, Mas- sachusetts, and Block Island 3—A. In September, and till 15th October, perhaps they are the best. * Q. What is the quality of the mackerel taken in the spring befor they spawn, everywhere ?—A. All No. 3's. Q. Wherever they are caught 2—A. Yes. Q. You have spoken in your examination of having seen food for mackerel as far out as George's Banks. Will you describe the different kinds of mackerel food you have yourself observed ?—A, The largest Quantity of food we find in mackerel is lantz. The largest we find are about four inches in length. Q. Lantz is a kind of sand-eel?—A. Something similar. Then we find What we call all-eyes, a very small fish about half an inch in length. It is a young fish of some kind, I don’t know what. - Q. Have you any opinion in regard to what it is ?—A. We sometimes AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2473 think they are young mackerel. We don’t know what they are because they are very young. Q. Where have you found those all-eyes 2–A. In great abundance at Block Island, and often twenty-five miles off the coast of that island. Q. In what quantities have you found them 2–A. They will some- times cover miles of water. They will be on the surface of the water so that you can pick them up in your hand, and can take five or six in the palm of your hand. Q. What extent of surface have you found covered with these little fish 7–A. We find them from alongside of the vessel till we reach three or four miles off in a boat; we find them the whole distance. I don’t know how far they may extend beyond, but quite a distance. Q. Is there any other food for mackerel?—A. There is what we call Cayenne; it is a seed of some kind or spawn. Q. Is there any other food?—A. Hay-seed or red-seed; it has various names among different classes of people. Q. What is that ?—A. I don’t know. Q. It is animal?—A. It is something that has life, I suppose. Q. How far out to sea do you find that?—A. On the George's Banks, and even to the north, west, and east of the George's. Q. IS that found very extensively, or only in small quantities 3—A. At Some Seasons very extensively, and at other seasons there will not be so much. We cannot tell exactly how extensive it may be. - Q. Is there any other mackerel food?—A. Sometimes the mackerel, When down near the bottom, feed on different kinds of fish near the bottom, such as shrimp. You find shrimp in mackerel at different times. - Q. And jelly fish?—A. I don’t know that I ever found any jelly fish in them. I have seen mackerel tear them to pieces, but whether they eat them or not I don't know. I have seen mackerel jump at them, but probably it was for some other fish that were round the jelly fish. Q. You carried fresh mackerel into the New York market 2—A. Yes. Q. That goes packed in ice, I suppose ?—A. Yes. Q. How many vessels are engaged in the business of carrying fresh mackerel into the New York market 2—A. About fifty sail. Q. And how many are engaged in the same trade for the Boston mar- ket 2—A. Nearly the same number, to the best of my knowledge. Q. Are those vessels of the same size as other vessels engaged in the fishing business elsewhere ?—A. Smaller vessels run with fresh mackerel to Boston than to New York. Q. What would you estimate as the average tonnage of vessels en- gaged in the fresh mackerel trade for New York, and also the average tonnage of vessels engaged in the same trade with Boston ?–A. Prob- ably Somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 or 55 tons for Boston, and perhaps 10 or 12 tons more for New York, on an average. Q. Not quite so large as the average of the Cape Ann fleet 2—A. No. Q. Can you give any idea of the quantity of fresh mackerel that goes into the New York market every season 3–A. I should say about a fair average would be 40,000 mackerel to a vessel. Q. Do you mean for the season or trip —A. For the season. Q. How many mackerel, such as go into the market, would there be On an average to a barrel ?–A. Of such mackerel as were taken there ; pring it would take in the neighborhood of 150 on an average to a alſTeſ. Q. How many fresh mackerel do you think go to the Boston market?— 2474 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. A. I have not much idea what the quantity is. I don’t know that I could come near it. - Q. Do those fresh mackerel vessels make a few long trips or many Short trips ?—A. They cannot keep out very long for the fish would not keep. They have to run in with the fish while they are good or they Will lose them. Q. About how long are the vessels out 3—A., Sometimes a week, and perhaps ten days; not longer than ten days after they get fish on board. Q. Now, take your experience in fishing for mackerel in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. What value would you attach to the right to fish within three miles of the shore in British dominions 3–A. What fish do we take inside of three miles 7 Q. You can take it in that way or in regard to its value.—A. I could not tell exactly the value because the fish vary in price a great deal. Q. Eſow important do you regard it?—A. At the outside, I have never #. experience taken more than one-eighth of a fare inside of three 111116°S, Q. Do you think that seining mackerel perceptibly diminishes the Quantity of mackerel found in the Sea 3—A. I cannot tell exactly, because Sometimes I think we kill some very young fish. But seining has been going on a number of years, and even three years ago mackerel were just as plentiful as I ever saw them, and they were quite abundant last year, while this year they are scarce. We cannot account for it. Q. Have you ever known seining to be carried on successfully in the Gulf of St. Lawrence %–A. No. Q. Do you know any reason therefor?—A. I hardly know what the reason may be ; perhaps it may be the tide, or it may be that the mack- erel do not school the same as they do with us. There are various rea- Sons. We don’t find many mackerel school on that fishing ground. .A. ‘’s So far as it has been tried there, seining has not been successful?— • NO. Q. Have you ever fished in the vicinity of Seal Island, near Cape Sable?—A. I have fished on that fishing ground for codfish sometimes. Q. Have you ever fished for halibut there ?—A. No. Q. Within what distance of Seal Island have you ever fished for cod- fish, and how have you happened to be there?—A. Sometimes We find fish scarce on George's Bank or other Banks where we fish in summer, and we run over there and try; but we hardly ever get inside of from 15 to 25 miles of Seal Island. Q. What is the shallowest water you ever knew the halibut fishery to be prosecuted in 3–A. I could not tell that, because I am not much ac- quainted with the halibut fishing, though I have been some few voyages. Q. You don’t expect to catch halibut in much shallower water than Codfish 3 — A. No ; generally deeper. - Q. And your codfish have not been taken within how far from land 3– A. From 15 to 25 miles of Seal Island, and in that vicinity. Q. You have made cod-fishing voyages; where to and how many, in general terms?—A. I could not tell you exactly how many; quite a number. Q. Where have you been ?—A. To the Grand Banks, Sable Island Banks, and others. s' Q. Have you tried both trawling and hand-line fishing 2—A. Yes. Q. What has been your bait"—A. For general use, herring. Q. And what else?—A. Sometimes we used clams. Q. Salt clams?—A. Yes; and sometimes Squid and menhaden. Q. Menhaden slivers ?—A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 24.75 Q. Have you ever been in to Newfoundland to buy bait for codfish 3– A. I have been there. Q. To what port?—A. St. Mary's Bay. Q. What did you buy?—A. We bought a lot of caplin; that was all we could get. Q. Was that good bait 2—A. No. Q. Why not ?—A. It would not keep any time in ice, and it was too Small. Q. What is the bait used on the George's Banks by codfishermen 3–A. Eor the first three trips in the winter time they take frozen herring, and after that they use alewives and menhaden, which they get in Vineyard Sound. s * Q. In regard to the mackerel fishing, what is the bait used for throw bait by mackerel vessels?—A. Menhaden slivers. , * Q. How far north is the extreme point where menhaden is caught 7– A. I don’t hardly remember, but probably nothing north of Grand Ma- man Island, and I don’t think they go that far. Q. Can you give us the price of fresh mackerel in New York and Bos- ton markets?—A. I don’t know that I can correctly. The prices vary a great deal. - By Mr. Davies: º Q. You are now pilot on board the Speedwell and do not go mackerel fishing now %—A. Yes. - Q. Have you had much experience in the fisheries of the Gulf of St. Lawrence & How many seasons have you been there?—A. I think I have been there five seasons. - * Q. And those seasons cover the whole of your experience there?—A. Yes. Q. In regard to fishing off the American coast your experience has been more extended ?–A. Yes. Q. How many seasons were you there ?–A. Five whole seasons, and parts of perhaps five other seasons. - Q. How far from shore were your mackerel taken on the American coast 2—A. All the way from 5 to 50 miles from the land and also off the off-shore Banks. George's Banks are 133 miles from Cape Ann, and we find mackerel there and off the northeast edge of the Banks. Q. Last year and the year before were very good fishing years 2—A. Very favorable; we could not complain. Q. I understand they were exceptionally good 7––A. Yes. Q. What was the condition of the mackerel fishery along the United States coast for the previous eight or ten years; had it been declin- ing 2—A. It does not appear to have been. Q. When you say “it does not appear to have been,” do you speak from actual experience 3–A. From what I have seen myself. Q. Did you examine the returns to see the quantity caught 7–A. I don’t know that I have properly, but as I am amongst the vessels, I have a pretty good chance of knowing how the others have been doing. At the close of every season when the vessels stop seining, I can see the reports of all the vessels and the quantity of fish landed. I have not those in my memory, because I never thought they would be of any assistance to me. Q. Are you able to state whether there was a decline in the mackerel fishery off the coast of the United States during the seven or eight years previous to 1875?–A. Not to my knowledge; I could not say there was. 24.76 AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION, Q. Could you say there was not ?—A. No. Q. In reply to Mr. Foster, where did you say seven-eighths of the inspected fish were caught 7–A. I said seven-eighths of the inspected fish in Maine and Massachusetts were caught between Block Island and Mount Desert. Block Island is in the State of Rhode Island, and Mount IDesert is in Maine. Q. Do you mean that to include all fish caught by American vessels?— A. I mean fish caught on the coast of the United States. I am not speaking of the fish caught in British waters. Q. It does not refer to the fish caught by American vessels in British waters?—A. No. *. Q. You speak from your practical knowledge, having been on the ground and Seen the fish taken 3–A. Yes. Q. You say that seven-eighths of the mackerel caught by American Vessels in American waters are caught between those two points 3–A. Yes. Q. And the other one-eighth is taken where?—A. It is taken to the Southward of that, between Hatteras and Block Island. Q. Have you examined the inspection returns?—A. We see them generally every season when the fishing is done. Q. You have not got any returns with you ?—A. No. Q. When you make your return after a fishing voyage, does that return embrace a statement of the places where the fish were taken 3– A. No. Q. Does it embrace the fact that the fish were taken in American or British waters ?—A. It does not. Q. Then if an American vessel took a cargo of fish into one of their ports, it would not appear from the official returns whether the fish had been caught in British or American waters ?—A. We see that a vessel is reported with so many barrels of fish from such a place. Q. That is in the newspapers ?—A. Yes. Q. Is there any official record kept 2—A. There is a record of each vessel kept by the owner. Q. I understood you to say, speaking with regard to the United States Coast, that there is a special school of mackerel in the neighborhood of Block Island, which is known as Block Island mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. And that they remain there the whole season and do not come north 3—A. They do not come north; we don’t find them north. Q. I understood you to say that mackerel fishing on the American Coast begins in May and does not end till November 2—A. It begins as early as 25th April. When it closes depends a great deal on the Weather. If there is a blustery, cold autumn, the mackerel will not stay so long; but if there is moderate weather, they will stay till 15th No- vember. Q. The fish remain on the coast, more or less, during that time 2—A. Yes. Q. And are taken in large and small quantities the whole of that time 2—A. Not in large quantities in the latter part of the season ; the body of the fish have gone off the coast. Q. All the fish taken before the spawning season you class as No. 3?—A. Yes; all that are long enough. They are threes and small threes. Q. When you speak of American vessels fishing in the spring for mackerel off the United States coast, they are fishing for the inferior class of mackerel ?—A. Yes. - Q. You described the different places where mackerel spawn, and you AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2477 said the time of spawning varied at different places along the American coast 3–A. Yes. Q. How do you know that mackerel spawn on George's Shoal %—A. Because there is a certain quantity of them taken there before Spawning, and others taken there after spawning. - Q. How do you know they spawn there? Have you seen young mackerel there ?—A. I have seen all-eyes, which We Suppose are young mackerel, on the George's. Q. Describe them.—A. It is a very small fish, probably not more than half an inch in length, and its eyes are more conspicuous than any other part of the body. You notice the eyes of the fish when swimming in the water before you observe the body. Q. You call them all eyes for that reason 7–A. Yes. Q. That is what makes you believe that mackerel spawn on George's Banks"—A. Yes. Q. Do I understand you to say that there are two schools of mackerel that come along the United States coast and that a distinct school comes along the Maine coast 3–A. The fish do not all come in to the coast at one time. Q. At different times?—A. Yes. Q. And a little later as you come further north 3–A. Yes. The fish do not all strike the coast at one point. Sometimes the mackerel will strike a little to the north of Hatteras, and you will fall in with another school of fish 50 miles north, that will come near the coast, within 50 miles, and perhaps less. *Y. Q. You said you found a body of fish frequenting Nantucket shoals, and you found that body afterwards on George's Banks 7–A. We find them sometimes at George's afterward; sometimes they don’t get So far eastward as that. We usually find part of them on the George's, at the Southwest part. - Q. The mackerel that are found off the coast of Maine remain there until they begin to return to their haunts for the winter, wherever those haunts may be 2–A. Yes; the mackerel on the coast of Maine and Mas- sachusetts. Q. Do you know whether fishermen ever take mackerel in the winter season in muddy places 7–A.. I have heard of mackerel being taken Out of the mud with a spear in the winter time. Q. Whereabouts 3–A. In Cape Cod Bay, Bridgehampton Bay, and in the vicinity of Cape Cod. º you ever examine the eye of the mackerel in early spring 3– A. Yes. Q. Can you tell the Commission whether the eye is then in the con- dition in which you find it afterwards, during the mackerel season, or what difference is there 7–A. When we first find the mackerel in early spring, there is always a sort of scale over probably two-thirds of the eye. As the mackerel work north, the scale comes off, and the last mackerel we find, those in the middle of November, have the scale again, covering a quarter of the eye. Q. It would then seem that in the spring the eye has a film Over it, and as the season advances, this works off?—A. Yes. Q. And as the colder season comes on, the film covers the eye again 3– A. It appears that something grows over the eye as the weather grows Colder. sº Q. Have you heard of mackerel being taken in winter under the ice º–A. I have heard of their being taken when the ice was on the flats, but not when the harbor was frozen. 2478 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. They were taken from the mud below the ice —A. Yes; at the deepest part of the island. * Q. When thus taken, would the film be over the eye º–A. I don’t lºnow. I only saw one caught in that way, and I did not take notice of that point. - Q. Do you know whether the mackerel winter in the mud —A. I could not say, but we have reason to think they do. That is the general opinion of fishermen—that the mackerel winter in the mud. - Q. Do the mackerel remain on George's Shoal all the Season, as the mackerel do at Block Island?—A. Some seasons they do, and other seasons they remain there only a short time. They have been taken there some years during all the Season. Q. You were five seasons fishing in the gulf, I believe?—A. Yes. Q. At what special places did you fish while there?—A. The principal part of my fishing in Gulf St. Lawrence was at the Magdalen Islands. Q. You never fished much in other parts 3–A. Not greatly; I have fished in other parts of the bay. Q. Have you ever fished in Bay Chaleurs ?—A. Yes, one summer. We spent one week there one summer. Q. What year was it 3–A. I cannot remember the year. Q. Can you remember the vessel you were in 2—A. I think it was in the Pocumtuc. Q. That would be some time in 1865?–A, About that time. Q. Had you any license at that time 2—A. I cannot recollect whether we had or not ; but I don’t remember hearing anything about a license. Q. Was there much of a fleet in Bay Chaleurs when you were there 2– A. No ; there were three vessels there. Q. Where did you go?—A. We went up as far as Port Daniel, on the north side of the bay. Q. Did you fish close to the shores at all 7–A. We tried round in the bay, but we did not find anything. Q. You did not go on the south side.7—A. No. Q. Did you fish off the Gaspé coast, and up at Bonaventure ?—A. I never fished there. Q. Or at Seven Islands 2—A. No. Q. You don’t know anything about those fishing-grounds?—A. No. Q. Have you tried along the west coast of New Brunswick, from Miscou Point to Miramichi?—A. I fished part of one summer along there. Q. Did you fish close inshore there ?—A. We did not fish close in- shore, for the water is too shallow to raise a body of mackerel. We fished from North Cape, Prince Edward Island, to Miscou Island. Q. Did you fish within three miles of the shore on the west side of New Brunswick"—A. To my certain knowledge, I did not. Q. Then you don’t know anything of that fishing-ground”—A. No. Q. Have you fished within three miles of the shore at Prince Edward Island”—A. Undoubtedly I have at different times. Q. And you caught nothing to speak of ?—A. Yes; I anchored there many times under the lee of the land at different parts of the island. Q. You did not catch many mackerel ?—A. We never took but very few mackerel inside of what we supposed was three miles off shore, ac- cording to the Soundings laid down on our chart, and the soundings We found with our lead. Q. What chart did you use 7—A. Eldridge's, mostly. Q. An American chart?—A. Yes. - Q. You did not use Bayfield's chart'—A. Not much. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2479 Q. From the chart you judged you were within three miles of the Shore?—A. That is the way we judged, by our soundings. Q. You tried the Cape Breton coast 3–A. Yes. ', Q. How did you find the fishing there ?—A. I remember catching Some mackerel one season near Margaree Island. Q. Any quantity to speak of ?—A. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 or 35 barrels. Q. Those were all ?—A. They were got in one day’s fishing at the lat- ter part of the season. & Q. You have already stated that you caught one-eighth of your mack- erel inshore; where did you get them 3–A. Inside of three miles at the Magdalen Islands. - § Q. You never caught any mackerel at all, except 35 barrels, within three miles of the shore, except at the Magdalen Islands?—A. Yes; I have caught a few mackerel at different times, within three miles of the land, probably at Prince Edward Island. I have taken mackerel there inshore, in very small quantities, perhaps one barrel or two. Q. Apart from the barrel or two caught at Prince Edward Island, you never caught any fish within three miles of the shore, but 35 bar- rels around Cape Breton ?—A. That is the largest catch I took, know- ing I was within three miles of the land. Q. Did you catch many within four miles of the land 7–A. No. Q. Did you catch many within five miles 3–A. No. You cannot raise a Sufficient body of mackerel in less than 20 fathoms of water to lay to and heave bait. I am speaking as I found it. Q. Do I understand you to say that you cannot raise a large body of mackerel within three or four miles of the shore?—A. I venture to say that I cannot do it, for there is not deep enough water. Q. Then is it not curious that you can find them around the Magda- len Islands 2—A. It is deeper water there than around any part of the COaSt. - * Q. Does not this map (a chart of the coast of North America from the Strait of Belle Isle to Boston, including the banks and islands of Newfoundland) show that the soundings around Prince Edward Island and Cape Breton are deeper than those off Magdalen Islands 2—A. I don’t know but this map shows that. Q. Would you say, looking at this map, that within three miles of Magdalen Islands you can find water 20 or 25 fathoms deep 7–A. In SOme parts we do. Q. Within three miles of the shore ?—A. We do. I don’t know that I can find it marked 20 fathoms deep. Q. You have shown why mackerel cannot be caught at Prince Ed- Ward Island?—A. I don’t say they cannot be caught there. I have Caught them there myself in small quantities. Q. Apart from the two or three barrels, you said mackerel were not to be had there, and you gave as a reason that the water was not deep enough 2—A. Sometimes we took them inside of three miles at the Magdalen Islands; sometimes not within fifteen miles of land. It is giving a large proportion to say that one-eighth of my catches were taken within three miles of land. Q. You did not say that it was giving a large or small proportion ?— A. I did not want to put it down too small. I have seen many trips taken when no fish were taken anywhere except at Magdalen Islands, and there pretty well offshore. & Q, You gave evidence that one-eighth of the catch was taken inshore; none appear to have been taken inshore except 35 barrels off Cape Bre- 2480 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. ton, and two or three barrels off Prince Edward Island 2–A. Did I say that two or three barrels were taken off Prince Edward Island, or two or three barrels each time We tried ? Q. Would it surprise you to hear that three-fourths or seven-eighths of the fish caught by boat-fishermen are taken within three miles, and almost within two miles, of the shore ?—A. I would be very much so. Q. Your theory would fall to the ground 7–A. I should think so. Q. Your experience in the gulf is confined to five seasons?—A. That is all; and part of that I remember very little of. Q. You don’t know what the other vessels have taken, or where their catches were taken 3–A. No. Q. You wish to confine your experience to that obtained in your ves- sel ?—A. Yes. Q. You wish the reason why mackerel could not be taken inshore to be received that it is because the water is too shallow, and that there must be 20 or 25 fathoms?—A. That is the way I caught mackerel my- Self. Q. Do you mean that that is with hand-lines or Seines 7–A. That is with hand-lines. I have never been seining. Q. Do you know why seines are not successful in the gulf?—A. I don’t know. I have heard various reasons given. Q. Have you ever heard that it was because the mackerel were too close to the shore to enable the Seiners to catch them 4–A. I have heard that reason. Q. Have you heard it from fishermen ?—A. I don’t know but that I have. Q. Have you any doubt about it 2–A. I cannot say I have or that I have not. I may have heard so. - Q. That they cannot Seine mackerel because they are in too shallow water 7—A. They have been seined there this summer. Q. To any large extent 3–A.. I don’t know to how large an extent. Q. Do you know whether any Seiners have adapted their seines to the waters of the gulf º–A. I cannot say as to that ; I have not been there. Q. So, practically, you know very little about the fishing in the gulf?— A.. I admit I know very little about it, and I will do less than I do now. {Q. You find your present position more profitable than that of a mack- erel fisherman 3–A. Probably my present position may not continue long. By Mr. Whiteway : Q. Have you been many seasons to the Grand Banks fishing?—A. No. Q. How many times 3–A. Perhaps once or twice. Q. When were those occasions 2—A. I cannot give you the dates. Q. Nor the years 7–A. No. - Q. Did you fish with salt or fresh bait 2–A. I have been there and fished with salt bait altogether some seasons. When I sailed out of IProvincetown I fished with salt bait altogether. Q. Have you ever used fresh bait on the Grand Banks 7–A. I have part of a voyage, part of the season. Q. Where did you get it 3–A. We bought it at Prospect, above EHalifax. r Q. What year was it that you went into St. Mary’s Bay for caplin 3– A. That was the year I was in the Pocum tuc; in the spring we went in there. We did not go in exactly for bait, but in coming out we bought Some caplin. I cannot tell you the year. Q. How many barrels did you buy 7–A. About 15 barrels, Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2481 Q. That is the only time you used caplin 3–A. That is the only time I have used any. Q. Are you sure the caplin you purchased at that time were perfectly fresh when you put them in ice º–A. I could not say. We got them from one or two boats which came up to us; but whether they had been caught 24 hours before or that morning I could not say. Q. Suppose other parties who have had experience in the use of caplin for bait packed in ice pronounced it to be a fish which would keep longer than any other, would you be disposed to contradict the statement 3– A. No ; because I have only tried it once, and I speak as I found it. Q. You fish with trawls and hand-lines 3–A. We were fishing with trawls then. Q. Fresh bait, I believe, is far superior to salt bait in fishing with trawls 2—A.. I did not find it so that season. We had salt clams, a very Costly bait, and we got our trip on it. - Q. How much did you pay per barrel for that bait 2–A. I think $10 that spring. Q. Do you remember what you gave for the caplin 3–A. From $1 to $1.50 per barrel. It was not over $2. Q. The Season you were fishing, were many American vessels fishing near you ?—A. Yes. Q. Were they using fresh or salt bait 2—A. Some with fresh and some with salt bait. Those using fresh bait did not fish where we did. We could not catch fish where they were. We could not catch as many as We could by ourselves. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. You spoke of the mackerel coming at different parts of the year to the Coast and spawning 7–A. Yes. Q. They must be different schools of fish, I suppose 2—A. Yes. yº They come from the deep waters and go inshore and spawn 3–A. €S. - Q. The fish spawning off Mount Desert would not belong to the same school as those which spawn off Sandy Hook 3—A. Certainly not. Q. Do you take the mackerel on St. George's Bank and the Banks in. the gulf where the bottom is rocky and broken, or where it is sandy, or do you take them under both these circumstances 3–A. Under both. But I do not know that I ever took much notice of that, because our Seines do not go to the bottom, and we have not much idea of what the bottom is. - Q. What is the case with the places which you have described as those where you go?—A. Some are rocky, and more parts are sandy. Q. Where is this so 2 Give an instance of it.—A. It is very rocky off Block Island. Q. And you take them there, as I understand it, rather later in the SeaSOn than at other places 3–A. Yes. There is a place twenty-One miles Southeast of Block Island where there is a small bank. A great many cod-fishermen lay there, and it is the best place for the large mack- erel to play and show themselves. By EIon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Do you consider that the mackerel go actually into the mud 2—A. I do not know as they do so. Q. Do you believe that this is the case ?—A. Yes. Q. But they are not of the nature of a mud fish at all ?—A.. I do not know that they are. 156 F 2482 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What do you think as to the theory of mackerel migrating 2 Do you believe that they go south altogether, or that they merely pass off shore into deep water?—A. I do not think that they go very far south, but rather that they go out to the northern edge of the Gulf Stream. Q. Do you think that they go altogether there ?—A. Probably all do not go ; perhaps there are other places where they go; but I think that they go away until they find warm water. Q. Is that the character of any other fish, to migrate into warm water 3–A. We have schools of other kinds of fish that come from the southward; there is the cod, which comes on the Banks. Q. Is their migration as well established as that of the mackerel ?— A.. I do not know but that it is. Q. Have you observed where they strike 3–A. I do not know that I have. Q. What signs have you seen of codfish migrating?—A. Well, I have caught them in different parts, of course. Q. Are there signs of their migrating & Do they migrate into warm water ?—A. I do not think that they do ; of course, we find some of them on the Banks, but we do not know where they go to or come from. I cannot tell. Q. No more than you can with respect to the mackerel ?—A. I do not know but this is the case. Q. You do not know whether the mackerel go into deep water or to the Gulf Stream 3—A. I do not know whether they go into the mud at all ; that is only what I think is the case. - Q. Have you seen evidence enough in all your experience to satisfy you clearly that the mackerel go into the Gulf Stream or spend their winter elsewhere ?—A. I do not know as I could say. No. 51. JAMES CURRIE, master mariner and fisherman, of Pictou, was called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster: Question. How old are you ?—Answer. Fifty-four. Q. Have you ever fished for mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. Where ?—A. In the bays of Pictou; in what is called the North- umberland Strait, from Cape George to Pictou Island, and from Cape George to Murray Harbor, and also from Pictou Island again to what is called the Gulf Wharf at Arisaig, and clear to the West Cape of Prince Edward Island. Q. In vessels or in boats?—A. In boats. Q. How large were they 3–A. Some of them were 20 feet keel, and others 22 feet and 25 feet. Q. How far out from the shore did the boats go when you fished in them 3–A. From Pictou Harbor to the East Point of Pictou Island is a distance of 9 miles, and from the latter point to Arisaig Wharf is some- thing like 12 to 15 miles. . Q. From land to land?—A. Yes. Q. How far out is most of the boat fishing with which you are acquainted, done 3—A. All I can tell you is that I have fished close along the shore, and that there we could not get anything worth speak- ing of. Q. Estimate the distance out at which you fished.—A. What I call shore fishing is done from half a mile to 14 miles out, and no quantity AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2483 of fish is to be got there, but you can go off shore 3 miles and outside of that, and get fish. - Q. Were you ever a pilot for a government vessel ?—A. Yes; this Was before Confederation—in 1854. Q. What were the names of the vessel and her captain 3—A. Re- sponsible was the vessel's name, and Philip Dodd the name of the Captain. Q. What was this vessel doing while you were pilot 2—A. We were looking after the American fishermen. Q. For what purpose ?—A. To see that they did not intrude on the shore fisheries. We cruised on the north side of Prince Edward Island, around on the south side of Cape Breton, and occasionally on the north side of Cape Breton. - - Q. How long were you on that vessel ?—A. Five or six months, I should say. - - Q. Did you find the American vessels fishing within 3 miles of the shore?—A. We did not find any fishing within three miles of the shore; they were all Outside of that limit. Q. Were any seizures made 2—A. None were made by the Re- Sponsible. Q. Did you see any made by other vessels?—A. No ; but I heard of this being done. - Q. Who owned the Tesponsible 2—A. My father. Q. And how did the government happen to have her under charge 3– A. They chartered her from my father. Q. Have you seen the boats go off-shore and fish in company with United States vessels 2—A. Yes; I saw this occur between Port Hood and Margaree Island, where we used to cruise considerably. I saw Scotch boats, as I call them, pull off and make fast to American schoon- ers, and get a good quantity of fish, loading their boats and going ashore; and that was outside of the three-mile limit. Q. You saw them made fast to the American schooners ?—A. Yes. Q. According to your observation, does fishing by the American ves- Sels injure the boat fishery 3–A. No. - Q. Why not ?—A. Because, on the grounds where they fish, as far as I have seen, the Americans feed the fish by heaving over quantities Of bait. Q. Are any fishing-vessels fitted out from Halifax; and, if so, how many 3–A. I do not exactly know, but there are not many fitted out from Halifax. Q. Are there any ?—A. I do not know of any. Q. Do the fishermen up here in the provinces, as far as you have ob- Served, get rich 3—A. No ; they are generally poor. Q. Do they lay up money 3–A. No. Q. By whom is the money made on fish 7–A. By the merchants in Halifax. By Mr. Thomson : Q. Are you a practical fisherman yourself”—A. Yes. Q. How long have you been engaged in fishing 2—A. I caught my first fish when I was 14 years old. Q. And how old are you ?—A. Fifty-four. Q. And have you been engaged in fishing ever since you were 14 2– A. No ; not all the time. I have been a pilot as well as a fisherman. Q. Do you call yourself a practical fisherman 2–A, I do. Q. Have you gone on fishing-voyages 3–A. I am a practical boat- fisherman. 2484 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. You have not fished in any schooner 2—A. Yes; but not as a fish- erman. I have made trading trips, having gone to buy fish, but not to fish myself. Q. You have not been in a vessel engaged in fishing 2—A. I have never been engaged in vessels as a fisherman. Q. Then you are not a practical fisherman except as concerns boats 3 —A. I should say that a man who understands boat-fishing could also fish on board of a schooner. - Q. You have never fished on a schooner 2—A. Not as a fisherman. Q. Did you ever fish at all in the Bay of St. Lawrence?—A. Yes. Q. In boats?—A. Yes. Q. Where ?—A. Off St. Peter's. Q. Did you go to reside there 3–A. No. Q. You happened to fish there ?—A.. I ran over there in a boat, be- cause we could not then get any fish at home. Q. You went there from Pictou ?—A. Yes. Q. To which St. Peter's did you go 2–A. To St. Peter's on the north side of Prince Edward Island. Q. Did you go over there in an open boat 3–A. Yes. Q. What is the distance across %–A. I do not know as I could tell you now exactly. Q. What is about the distance 2—A. It is something like 125 miles, I guess, around down to East Point; and then it is between 40 and 50 miles up the island to St. Peter’s. Q. That would make the distance 170 miles 2—A. I will not swear to that. Q. You went there in an open boat 2—A. Yes. Q. How often did you try that experiment 2—A. Twice in my life- time. I was there this summer in a boat which I built myself, and I was there twelve years ago. Q. That would be in 1865 %–A. I do not know about that ; but I Know that it is all of twelve years ago. We loaded with Codfish. Q. You were not then mackerel-fishing 2—A. No ; that was in the Spring. Q. You never fished for mackerel in the Bay of St. Lawrence at all 2– A. Yes; I have. Q. When 3–A. Fifteen years ago. Q. What were you in 3–A. A schooner. Q. I thought you told me you never fished in a schooner 2—A. We were trading, and sometimes when we could not buy any fish we turned to and caught them ; but this was not making a summer's work of it. You asked me if I was a hired fisherman, and I told you that I was not. Q. I asked you if you were in the habit of fishing in schooners.-A. I have done so; but not as a hired fisherman. Q. What, then, was your business 3–A. I was hired under the boss trader of that schooner. Q. What were you doing 2—A. Trading. Q. Where?—A. We were at North Cape, Cape Breton, and previously at Ingonish, Cape Breton, and then we went into the Bay of St. Law- rence and afterward to the south side of North Cape, Cape Breton. Q. Did you trade at Prince Edward Island 7–A. No ; but we hap- pened to sail that way, and we heaved out the lines one evening to see if we could catch any mackerel. We were going to Pictou when we were caught by a head-wind and taken as far as Cascumpeque; the wind then headed off again and We came around East Point and went home. Q. You did not trade then 3–A. No. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2485 Q. You did not go out to fish at all ?—A. We had fishing-gear on board, and we went for the purpose of catching fish that day. Q. But was your schooner fitted out for fishing 2—A. No, but for trading ; she had, however, fishing-gear on board. Q. What do you call fishing-gear 2—A. She had somewhere about six nets on board, and mackerel jigs and lines enough for six men, and such and Such bait as we could buy as we went along the shore. Q. Where did you get it 2–A. At Little Canso, before we went round Scatarie. Q. Had you barrels in which to put your fish 3–A. Yes. Q. Then you were on a kind of mixed trip—trading and fishing 2– A. Of course. When we could not buy, we caught them if we could. Q. How many fish did you catch during the whole trip 3–A. We caught 150 barrels. Q. Where?—A. Between Ingonish, Capelbreton, and St. Peter's, Prince Edward Island. We were not exactly close inshore. Q. What do you call close inshore ?—A. From one-half a mile to 14 miles, and perhaps 1; or 3 miles off shore. Q-But were you very nearly close inshore ?—A. We were not inside of three miles from it anyway; none of them were taken within this limit. Q. Not one of them 3–A. No. Q. I suppose that you would not have caught any within three miles of the shore if you could have done so 2–A. Yes; we would, if we could have got any there. Q. Did you try in there ?—A. Yes. Q. I suppose you knew that you had no right to fish there?—A. We Were in a British schooner, and we had a right to fish anywhere where We could get fish. Q. Did you attempt to fish within three miles of the shore?—A. I tell you plainly that we tried in there, but we could not get the fish there to any amount. - Q. What did you catch there ?—A. I remember that one day we took 25 mackerel there. # Q. And that is the only day you do remember of having caught fish there ?—A. No. Q. What other days did you do so 7–A. There are plenty more days When this was the case. Q. I suppose you remember that day because so few were then caught 3–A. Yes; it did not pay us much for that day’s work. Q. Other days you did much better work 2–A. Yes. - Q. Do I understand you to state to the Commission that the inshore fisheries along Prince Edward Island are good for nothing 2—A. I do not think that they are good for anything, between you and me. Q. During how many years have you been acquainted with them 2– A. I was fourteen when I caught my first fish. Q. Was this on the shore of Prince Edward Island %–A. No ; but off Sheet Harbor, down here. In 1857, my father moved to the town of Pictou, and the next spring we fitted out and went away around the Shore fishing. My father is now in Nebraska. Q. I understand you to state that, in your opinion, the inshore fisher- ies on the north side of Prince Edward Island—that is, within three miles of the coast, are good for nothing 2—A. They are good for noth- ing ; that is the way it lays now. Q. And the way it has always lain so far as you are aware ?—A. Yes. Q. While you have been acquainted with them 3–A. Yes. 2486 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q.” And that is your opinion under oath 3–A. I am on my oath. It is my oath which I am looking after. Q. And these fisheries are really good for nothing 2—A. They are really good for nothing. Q. How often have you fished along the shore on the north side of Prince Edward Island, to justify you in giving that opinion ?—A. The next year after I was in the Responsible I was fishing in the bay; this was in 1854. Q. How often did you fish there ?—A. I may say that since I have been in Pictou–that is since 1857, with the exception of some times when I have gone piloting, and more times when I went navigating to the West Indies, and when I was in one of your steamboats piloting to Boston, I have been engaged in fishing in the spring, summer, and fall, almost every year except four or five years. - Q. Have you been fishing for mackerel ?– A. Yes; and for cod and hake. ' - Q. Within 3 miles of Prince Edward Island 2—A. Yes; and outside of 3 miles. Q. I am speaking of inside of 3 miles from the shore ?—A. Inside of that distance I tell you plainly that mackerel cannot be caught to any amount. Q. If you have no experience as to fishing within the 3-mile limit, how can you say that this fishery is worth nothing 2—A. I say that from my experience there are no fish to be got within 3 miles of the shore, but they can be got outside of that. Q. What experience have you of the fishing within 3 miles of the northern side of Prince Edward Island 7–A. I think I have spoken plainly enough. I tell you that you can catch no fish inshore; they are all caught Outside. Q. How often have you fished where I have mentioned ?–A. All of twenty times at different times. Q. How long were you there on each of these occasions 2—A. I Sup- pose sometimes two months, and sometimes three months, and so on. Q. Were you in fishing vessels 3–A. I told you that I was never a hired fisherman on a fishing vessel. I was in fishing boats from 20 to 22 and 25 feet keel. - Q. Where did they belong to ?—A. Two of them I built myself. Q. When you were living at Pictou ?–A. Yes. Q. Did you not tell me that you so fished only on two occasions 3–A. I said I did so on two occasions, and into two boats which I built myself. *. º You said you went there once this year and once twelve years ago? —A. Yes. - Q. How does it now happen that you say you have fished there twenty times º–A. I say that I have fished there all of twenty times. Q. In open boats?—A. Yes; and I have been there from two to three months each time. - Q. In Open boats 2—-A. Yes. Q. On each of these twenty occasions was your place of residence Pictou ?–A. Yes. Q. Did you not tell me that you had gone over there twice?—A. Yes. Q. Did you ever go over there in any other boats but your own?—A. Yes; but not from Pictou. Q. Where did you go from ?–A. Murray Harbor. I went there to earn a living. - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2487 Q. Murray Harbor is on the south side of Prince Edward Island 2– . Yes. Q. What did you go there for?—A. I was seeking for employment. Q. And you were employed in boats there ?—A. Yes. Q. You went in boats from there to fish for mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. What were you fitted out for generally 2—A. For cod-fishing; but We could not get them on that shore, and so we went round to the north side of the island to see what we could do mackerel fishing. 3. Q. And you could not catch any mackerel ?—A. Not inshore. Q. Will you give us the names of the owners of these boats in which you were ?—A. One of them was named Jackson; and I think that the Other three are lost; they are dead now. I forget their names. Jack- Son is now living. - * * Q. And you remained fishing for three months?—A. For two or three months. - Q. And during this time you caught nothing?—A. Nothing to make it worth while. Q. What did you get 2—A. Something like 15 barrels of mackerel ° and 20 quintals of codfish. Q. And that was all ?—A. Yes. Q. Is that a specimen of your catches all through these twenty times? —A. It is—about. Q. Did you always go fishing there during those twenty times from Murray Harbor ?– A. No. Q. Where else did you go from ?—A. We went once from Whitehead, down on this side of Canso. Q. Where did you go then 3—A. To the north side of the island. I was with Tom Munroe, who is living now. Q. Did you fish inshore ?—A. Yes. - Q. And you caught nothing 2—A. Nothing to speak of; but we got Some, of course. - Q. What induced you to go fishing there after the experience you had 3–A. I was hard up, and did not want to remain idle. There were fish to be got there if you went off the shore far enough ; but we had not the means, and we could not get them. Q. But there were fish there ?—A. Yes; off on the grounds; but we Wanted capital in order to catch them. Q. How was the fishing where you were ?–A. I did not see any fish; if I had, I would have got some of them. Q. You say that the inshore fisheries are worth nothing 2—A. Yes. Q: Why, then, did you continue to fish there?—A. You must under- Stand that I was not master of the boat. I was only a hired man, and I had to do as my master told me; and that is the reason why we did not catch the fish. Q. Did you not tell them that they could get no fish inshore?—A. Yes. Q. And though you told them that it was of no use, they did fish in- shore ?—A. Yes; certainly. Q. Do you not think that they had had some experience in fishing in that locality themselves?—A. Perhaps this was the case. Q. Had they such experience or not ?—A. I thought this was the case; but they did not keep to their arrangement with me; they were too frightened to go off shore, but some men are not frightened to do so in an Open boat. Q. And you are one of them ?—A. Yes. Q. Where did you put up at night?—A. In the cuddy, forward. 2488 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. You did not go inshore ?—A. No. Q. You did not then run into a harbor 7—A. If it was dark and stormy looking we certainly would go in for the night. Q. Then on these different occasions you never made harbor at night 3—A. Yes; but not as a general thing. Q. And on these different occasions you kept inshore ?—A. The man I was hired with did so. Q. This was the case on the twenty occasions you speak of ?—A. Yes; save on two of these occasions, when I went fishing in boats belonging to myself. Q. And on eighteen occasions you kept inshore ?—A. Yes. Q. And caught nothing there?—A. Yes; nothing worth speaking of Q. And these people would not go out beyond 3 miles to fish?—A. No. Q. How far from the land did you keep 7–A. From half a mile to 1; and 2 miles. Q. In other words, you actually fished eighteen times, for two or three months at a time, and you never caught more than 15 or 16 barrels of fish 7–A. No. \ Q. You so fished during eighteen different seasons for three months " at a time 2—A. Yes. Q. How did you get provisions 3–A. We took them with us. Q. Did you take provisions for three months in an open boat 3–A. Yes; they were stowed away in the cuddy. - Q. Was this an open boat?—A. Yes; with a cuddy forward. There were from four to five or six hands on board. A barrel of flour, with other things, will do this number for six month's time. w Q. What was the size of the boat 7–A. 20, 22, or 25 feet keel. You can get boats down here with 18 feet keel that will carry 500 quintals of codfish. Q. And provisions for six months 3–A. A barrel of flour, with other necessities, stores, will do it. Q. Where do you stow them 3–A. Forward. Q. Not in the cuddy ?—A. Yes. Q. And you had barrels of fish on board, and salt, and all that ?–A. Certainly. Q. How many barrels had you on board 3–A. A 300-quintal boat could take about 150 barrels. Q. How many had you on board 7–A. About 100, I suppose, includ- ing whole barrels and half barrels, to make stowage for the boat. Q. How many barrels of salt had you?—A. We buy this by the hogs- head, but to make ballast we put it into barrels, unheading them as we use it. A hogshead holds 7 bushels. º Q. How many hogsheads had you ?–A. About 15. Q. You had besides 100 barrels to put fish in aboard?—A. Yes; and We could stow fish away in bulk. Q. And besides all these you had in an open boat provisions for six men for three months?—A. Yes. Q. And all this in a boat of 25 feet keel ?--A. Yes; that is done in the country. - Q. And you never went into a harbor at all?—A. We used to do So if it looked dark and stormy and the like of that. Q. And you never went outside of the three-mile limit while on these Voyages?—A. No ; not in the boats in which I was a hired man. Q. You did not do so these eighteen times?—A. No. Q. Never at all ?—A. No ; not in the boats in which I was. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2489 Q. And they would not go more than 1% miles out 2—A. No ; but I saw boats outside of that. Q. But they would not go there 3—A. Yes. Q. And this was done for eighteen different seasons; the same thing was done over and over again º–A. Yes. Q. So that from this experience you swear positively that, in your Opin- ion, the inshore fisheries on the north side of the Prince Edward Island are good for nothing?—A. They are good for nothing; and this is also the case with the shore fishery of Northumberland Strait. Q. And if people came here and swore that plenty of fish are to be caught, and are caught, on the north side of Prince Edward Island, you would not believe one word of it 3–A. No more than as to what I have stated; you may get there from 10 to 15 quintals of codfish, and per- haps from 15 to 20 barrels of mackerel; but this is not going to pay a CI'êW. Q. You do not believe it if people say that the best fishing is in- shore ?—A. No ; not one word of it. Q. In fact, the inshore fisheries are worth nothing 2—A. Yes; but outside the limits you will get fish. Q. But with that splendidly fitted out boat you never thought of going out there to try 3–A. No. Q. How far along the shores of Prince Edward Island did you fish on these occasions 3–A. As far as Cascumpeque, I think. Q. Did you fish off Rustico 3–A. I cannot say that we hove a line off there. Q. Did you sail up as far as that ?—A. Yes; we went as far as Cas- Cumpeque. Q. Why did you not try there ?—A. A fair wind was blowing, and we did not think it worth while. Q. Is not Rustico considered the best fishing-ground around the island 3—A. No. L Q. Where is the best fishing-ground around the island?—A. Off New ondon. Q. That is the next harbor to Rustico 3–A. Yes. Q. Did you try there 3—A. No. Q. Why not?—A. Well, when I was there I was a hired man; I was not master of the boat, and I could not tell my master to go to Work and fish there. Q. Did he fish at Rustico 3–A. We fished inshore, but we got nothing; what I call getting nothing is when a man makes a voyage, and when he comes back cannot pay his debts; that is nothing, and worse than Inothing. Q. You say you were in the schooner Responsible in 1853 3–A. Yes. Q. And you took no American vessels fishing in the bay within the three-mile limit 3–A. No ; one morning we found one inside at Mag- dalen Island, but when we came to examine, she was getting wood and Water. N Q. You never saw any other American vessel inside of the limit 3—A. O. Q. Did you not see others, which got out of the way, and beyond the three-mile limit before you could take them 3–A. No ; we sailed along one foggy morning, and tried to catch them, but we could not. Q. You wished to see if any were inside 7–A. Yes. Q. Why, then, did you try to catch them 7–A. It was on account of the noise made about their imposing on the provinces; and the thing Was to get them if we could. t 24.90 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. You knew that there were none within the three-mile limit 3–A. We sailed along the shore in a fog and tried to catch them. We sailed from cape to cape, in the vicinity of the three-mile line, but none of the American vessels attempted to come inside. Q. Did you not say you tried to catch them inside 3–A. No ; we sailed from cape to cape, in the fog, but never found one of them inside. Q. You never saw one of them 2–A. Not inside; but there were plenty outside in the fog; and I saw the Scotch boats make fast to them and catch mackerel. Q. Was this on foggy days?—A. Yes; and other days, too. yº. There were other government vessels in there at that time 7––A. €S. - - - Q. And they happened to seize vessels 2—A. I think they had to give Some of them up afterward. Some seizures were made ; but I do not know whether they were legal or not. We did not see a chance to make any legally. ... * Q. How many vessels were seized that year 2—A. I do not remember just now. i Q. Of how many seizures did you hear?—A. I could not tell you just now, it is so long ago, and I have not bothered my memory about it since. I think that Leybold took one or two, as near as I can recollect, and the brig Halifax was out at the same time. Sir Colin Campbell, on a man-of-war brig, had something to do with some of them, and he made more mischief with Nova Scotia fishermen for telling yarns about these matters than with the Americans, and he did not let the former Out of Port Hood for a month. * } Q. You seem to have a prejudice in this regard 2–A. No ; I have In OD162, - Q. I asked you what vessels were seized ?–A.. I cannot give you either the names or the number of them. Q. What did you hear about them 3––A. I do not remember just now. Q. How are you now employed 2–A. I have no employment at pres- etht. Q. Where do you reside 3—A. At Pictou. Q. If I understand you aright, when the Americans came in to fish within three miles of the shore the boat-fishermen made fast to the American fishermen ?—A. Yes; but this was not within but outside of the three-mile limit, and many of the boats thus got good catches. Q. Do the American vessels come within the three-mile limit 3–A. Yes; to approach the harbors. - Q. But do they do so to fish 7–A. I cannot answer that more than to say that I have never seen them catch any fish inside of the three- mile limit, though I have heard people say that they come to fish Within three miles of the shore. Q. Did you ever see them do so 3–A. No. I mean by Seeing them fishing seeing them haul the fish up. Q. Did you ever so see them in the act of fishing 2—A.. I never saw them more than sailing along the bays, and so on. Q. I understand you to say that you have been for forty years en- gaged in fishing, and that during this time you never saw an American vessel fishing within three miles of the coast 2—A. No. Q. You never did Ž–A.. I never did. Q. Either on the coast of Nova Scotia, of Prince Edward Island, or of Cape Breton ?—A. No. - Q. You have seen them fishing very near the three-mile limit, AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2491 but never inside of it?—A. I have seen them inside of it, but I never saw them fishing inside of it. Q. They were then merely sailing,”—A. Yes. Q. Then all these British boat-fishermen who made fast to the Amer- ican vessels went outside of the three-mile limit to take advantage of the American bait 2–A. Yes. Q. And the Americans never came within the three- limit at all 7–A. Not that I have seen. Q. Do you think it possible for them to have come inside of it without your having seen them 2–A. Yes; I only stick to what I have seen myself. w | Q. Do you not think it odd that this should be the case during these forty years?—A. I have heard people say that they came inside the limit to fish, but I have never seen them do so; I do not know as I ever did. Q. Do you believe that the American fishermen have ever fished within the three-mile limit on the coast of Nova Scotia, of Prince Edward Island, or of Cape Breton ?—A. Well, as to the believing part, I have heard men who tell the truth say that they have done so; but at the same time I have never seen it. Q. Do you believe the persons who said so or not ?—A. I have heard people Say SO. - Q. Do you believe them ?—A. I believed one or two men occasionally; but I do not say whether this is the case or not. I did not see it. Q. As far as your experience goes, you believe that the Americans never have fished within three miles of the land during the last forty years 7–A.. I do not know about that; that is getting it rather tight on a man. I might have an opinion that they did do it, and would not like to say that they did not do it; but I have not seen them do it. Q. What is your opinion in this regard 3–A. My opinion is, that I do not think that the intruding of the Americans on our shore is worth talking about. I believe this much, that if the people of Nova Scotia would give the American fishermen a little more freedom, the boat fish- ermen would have a better chance. Q. You are strongly in favor of the Americans coming inside of the 3-mile limit to fish 7–A. Yes; because then I would not have to row so far off on a calm morning. | Q. Why?—A. When there is no wind, we have to pull the boat off. Q. What has that to do with this question ?—A. We want to get alongside of the vessels, where the bait is thrown, and get some of the fish that the vessels raise. Q. You mean that you cannot get any fish within three miles of the shore at Pictou ?—A, No. Q. And you cannot get anything there unless the American schooners come there and throw bait out 2—A. Yes—nothing worth speaking of. Q. Do the American schooners come off Pictou and throw out bait, as a rule %–A. I have seen them between East Point, Pictou Island, and Arisaig Wharf, or Gulf Wharf. Q. And wherever they throw out bait, you go to fish 2—A. I have seen them come quite close to the Three-Mile light, at Pictou Island, and raise mackerel half way between that point and the Gulf Wharf. Q. And then you got Some fish 7–A. Yes. Q. Then I understand that you wish the Commission to understand that unless the Americans come there and throw out bait, even the in- shore fishery is good for nothing 2—A. Yes; and you must not think 2492 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. that I have any prejudice about it, for this is not the case ; I have DOI) e. Q. In point of fact, you say that unless the American fishermen are allowed to fish off our coasts, our own fishermen cannot catch any- thing"—A. No. By Mr. Foster : * Q. Does anybody get any considerable quantity of mackerel without throwing out bait 7–A. No ; it takes a quantity of it to raise the mack- erel. Q. Do the small-sized boats usually have a considerable quantity of bait to throw over ?—A. No. Q. Will you tell me how many men there were on board of the vessel or large boat on which you were 7–A. There were six of us. Q. Will you describe what kind of boat it was, and state its length and tonnage %–A. An open boat has no tonnage. The boat was of 22 feet keel, 11 feet 6 inches beam, and 5 feet 6 inches in depth of hold ; she had something like 6 or 7 feet laid off for a forecastle, called the cuddy; the two sides of the boat were furnished with bunks for the men to sleep in ; and then there was what was called standing room for the captain ; and between this and the main mast was another place where we stowed away nets, fishing-lines, and fishing-gear of all kinds— a barrel of flour and a barrel of beef and a barrel of pork, if we wanted it. Q. Do you know the boat's tonnage %–A. I could not tell you ; none of the boats are measured, because they are open. By keeping them open, we get clear of custom-house taxes, while if we decked them fore and aft, we would have to pay taxes at every port which we entered. Q. Are they like the boats called in Newfoundland western boats, Which stay out at sea 3—A. Yes; pretty much. Q. Which stay out for three and four weeks, and scarcely ever go beyond three miles from the shore ?—A. They are not built on the same principle ; we Nova Scotians call the western boats of Newfoundland jacks. Q. How do these boats of yours compare in size with the Newfound- land jacks 7–A. Ours are not quite so large. Q. How much smaller are they 7–A. If the jacks are of 25 tons bur. den, our boats are something like 15 tons. Q. Inotice that Mr. Killigrew in his testimony speaks of western boats manned by six men for six months, and states that their tonnage varies from 22 to 28 tons, and that they follow the fish to different parts of the coast. Sir Alexander Galt asked him if they staid out at sea, and he replied : Yes; perhaps for three or four weeks. They are something like our Bankers, but they only fish about a couple of miles from the shore. They scarcely ever go farther than that from the coast. Q. You know what kind of boat this is 3–A. Yes. Q. And you say that if this is of 25 tons, yours are of 15 tons?—A. Yes. - - By Mr. Davies: - Q. What is the length of the keel ?—A. Twenty-two feet. Q. What is the beam 3–A. Eleven feet six inches. Q. Do you say that a boat of 22 feet keel has 11 feet beam 3–A. Eleven feet six inches we generally call it; the hold is some 5 feet 6 inches. Q. And six feet is taken in the bow for the cuddy?—A. Six or Seven feet, I should say. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2493 Q. It has two masts?—A. Yes. Q. And is schooner-rigged 3–A. Yes. No. 52. WILLIAM PERRY, fisherman and seaman, of Sheet Harbor, Nova Scotia, was called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn, and examined. By Mr. Dana: Question. How far is Sheet Harbor east of Halifax %–Answer. About 45 miles. - Q. During how many years have you lived there 3—A. About twenty- five or thirty years. Q. Do you recollect the year when you first went fishing 3–A. No ; I first went fishing with my father in the bay. Q. For mackerel or Cod 3–A. For Cod. Q. Where did you go?—A. I used to go boat-fishing with him at home, and then my brothers and myself got a vessel and went on What we call the Banks, 15 or 20 miles off the coast of Nova Scotia, in deep Water. Q. You did not then go into the bay ?–A. No ; that would be early in the Season. Q. Are these Banks 15, or 20, or 30 miles out from the shore?—A. Yes; in from 60 to 75 fathoms of water. Q. And there you caught codfish 2–A. Yes. Q. Did you go into the bay afterward 7–A. Yes; in August and the latter part of July ; and I have been here September. Q. You were fishing on the Banks off Nova Scotia in May and June?— A. Yes. - Q. And afterward you went up the Gulf of Saint Lawrence?—A. Yes. Q. Where did you go then 2–A. Up about Prince Edward Island, and I have been up as far as Anticosti Island, over to Labrador, and around the Magdalen Islands. Q. Were you cod-fishing still ?—A. Yes; we fished out in the bay off the island. - Q. What was the tonnage of your vessel ?–A. We had two vessels; one was very small and the other was of 25 or 30 tons or along there. Q. What was the tonnage of the small vessel ?—A. About 15. Q. When you used to go into the bay to fish at the different places you have mentioned, how far off shore did you catch your fish 7–A. IFrom 8 to 12 and 15 miles. Q. Have you tried the inshore fisheries?—A. Yes. We never do try for cod, however, inside of 8 or 10 or 12 miles from the shore; we con- sider it useless to do so in vessel fishing; of course the boats fish closer in. - Q. You have not been engaged in boat fishing in the bay ?—A. No. Q. Have you seen American vessels fishing in the bay ?—A. Yes; very often. * Q. At about what distance off shore have you so seen them 3–A. At all distances; some were 8 or 10 miles off, and others 3, 4, 5, and 6 miles off. I have seen them fishing very often on the ridge between Cape George and Prince Edward Island. Q. There are shoaler and well-known places of fishing-grounds along there 3—A. Yes. 2494 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. At what distance would this lie from the main land 2–A. Abou 8 or 10 miles. - Q. And there are good fishing-grounds along these shoal spots 3—A. Yes. I have never had any experience in fishing on them, but I have remarked the vessels fishing there very often. Q. In your experience, have you seen American vessels actually en- gaged in fishing within what you are reasonably certain was 3 miles from the coast, and, if so, to what extent has this been the case ?—A. I have, I believe, seen them fishing in close to, if not closer than, 3 miles from the shore sometimes, but not very often. I have seen them fishing far- ther out oftener than close in, in my opinion ; but I could not judge ex- actly as to the distance by looking at them. Q. You spoke of their fishing from 5 to 8 miles off shore ?–A. Yes. Q. And sometimes you have seen them at what seemed to be nearer than 3 miles from the coast 3–A. Yes. Q. But mainly you have seen them fishing outside of the 3-mile limit 3–A. Yes. Q. Where are the mackerel found in Schools—inside or outside of the 3-mile limit 3–A. I have often remarked, when sailing up the bay, large schools away off shore, and again I have seen them school very close to the shore. Q. Are the schools inshore generally broken up 3–A. Yes; they gen- erally do break up and scatter round the shore. Q. When did you give the fishing business up 3–A. About five years ago I found that it did not pay, and so I bought a little larger vessel and went into the coasting business. Q. Did you devote yourself industriously to the fishing business?— A. Yes; as far as my means allowed me to do so I did. Q. I suppose that you had not enough capital for large vessels and great outfits 3–A. No. Q. Why do your people not do as the Americans do, and build large, fine vessels, and go off and fish outside, and catch good large catches and get large fish 3–A. I cannot tell you, unless they are afraid of the money. Q. Or they have not got it 7–A. Yes. Q. In your case, I suppose that you did not bave it 2—A. No. Q. In all this time, from 1863 to 1872, that you were fishing there, were you part owner of all the vessels in which you were ?—A. Yes. Were you sole owner º–A. No ; there were three of us—brothers. . What are your brothers' names 3–A. John and Patrick. . Where do they live 3–A. At Sheet Harbor. . And you three owned the Vessels 3–A. Yes. Did you all go fishing 3–A. Yes, and together. . Under the Dominion flag º–A. Yes. . You had a right to go inside and fish as much as dyou liked 7–A. Y . While you were cod-fishing did you occasionally take a catch of mackerel ?—A. We used to take them for bait. Q. Where ?—A. Sometimes where we were fishing, and sometimes closer in shore. - Q. You caught them where you were fishing for cod?—A. Yes. Q. Did you catch the greater or better part of these fish there or close in 3–A. We never could make a great catch of mackerel. We did not have the means to do so. We were not fitted up with bait mills; and our catch of mackerel was very small, sometimes it consisted of a barrel, a half a barrel, or somewhere along there. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2495 Q. What have you been doing since 1872 —A. Coasting and trading. Q. You have not been fishing since then 3–A. No, Save last year when I fished with Seines for herring. Q. Where ?–A. At the Magdalen and Anticosti Islands. Q. Was your fishing a success or a failure ?—A. The fish were plenti- ful where we were. Q. From what you learned from other vessels, what was the result of the mackerel fishing last year 7—A. These fish were then very scarce as I could understand. Q. You know Halifax pretty well ?—A. Yes. Q. Are there any fishing vessels fitted out in Halifax *—A. I could not say, but I do not think that many are fitted out here. There may be some for all I know. - Q. Do you know of one 7–A. No, not down our way. Q. But in the port of Halifax %–A. I could not say that for certain I know of one so fitted out. By Mr. Doutre : Q. Who requested you to come here as a witness 2—A. Mr. Mackasey introduced me to these gentlemen, and they asked me a few questions concerning the matter and I gave them my opinion as far as my little experience goes. Q. What were you asked ?–A.. I was asked concerning the fisheries in and off shore. Q. You were asked your opinion about them 2–A. Yes. Q. Were you asked what you yourself had seen 7–A. Yes; and what experience I had had in fishing. * Q. How often have you fished in the Gulf of St. Lawrence 2—A. I have fished there some three or four summers, three to the best of my knowledge, that is for part of the season. Q. This includes the years when you were fishing with your brothers?— A. Yes. Q. Were you exclusively fishing for cod 2–A. Yes, we went for the purpose of catching cod. Q. Where have you been fishing 2—A. In the bay, to Labrador, over about Anticosti, and down around Sydney and Cape North, and all around this shore. Q. You were always looking for cod 2–A. Yes. Q. How far did you fish from Anticosti”—A. About 9 miles—be- tween it and Labrador on the banks there. We generally made a har- bor at Mingan, on the Labrador coast, and got our bait there. Q. What are you doing now %–A. Nothing. I sold my vessel this summer, and I am building a vessel, which is not yet finished. Q. Where were you when the conversation took place which led to your coming here as a witness?—A. I came up to EHalifax on busineSS, and being well acquainted with Mr. Mackasey my meeting him led to my coming here. Q. You say you only fished for mackerel for bait 2—A. Yes. Q. Where did you look for that bait 2–A. We often tried for it when laying at anchor on the ground where we fished for cod, and We Would catch some mackerel there sometimes; at other times we would go in- Shore and We would find some there. Q. How far off shore ?—A. From 2 to 3 or 4 or 5 miles. Q. What do you call inshore ?—A. Coming close to the land. Q: What distance from it?—A. I could not exactly say, but it would be 3 or 4 or 5 miles from it sometimes. 2496 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. You call 5 miles inshore ?—A. Yes—from where we would be fish- ing, and we would go in, may be half the distance between us and the shore, and try. Q. Have you ever fished on American vessels?—A. No. Q. You say you have seen American vessels fishing 2—A. Yes. Q. How near the shore ?—A. I should say within the 3-mile limit sometimes, and sometimes farther off–8 or 9 miles off. Q. Where did you see the larger number of them fishing?—A. I have seen a very large fleet fishing on the ridges between Cape George, in the fall of the year when I would be going to the islands. Q. How far from the coast ?—A. 8 or 9 miles as near as I can judge, and I have seen them fishing closer to and along the shore. Q. Did you ever see a school of mackerel ?—A. Yes; and many a OIle. Q. Where ?—A. In all parts of the bay. Q. Near the shore or away from the shore ?–A. Yes. Q. What are your brothers doing now %–A. One of them is fishing. Q. On his own account?—A. Yes. Q. Which one is this?—A. John. Q. Do you know whether he is fishing for cod or mackerel ?–A. He is cod-fishing. - - Q. Is that his usual occupation ?—A. Yes; he also goes herring fishing. , Q. With nets 2—A. Yes. Q. Where did you take the barrel or half a barrel of mackerel which you mention as having taken for bait 2–A. Wherever we could find them. Sometimes it was where we were fishing, and sometimes else- Where. -- Q. Where are herring generally taken 2–A. Great quantities of them are taken at the Magdalen Islands and at Anticosti, in the spring. Q. How far from the shore?—A. Along the shore, in the harbors. Q. A few acres from the shore?—A. Yes. Q. Have you been paid to come here?—A. No. By Mr. Dana : Q. Did you come from home for the purpose of appearing here and giving evidence %–A. No. /* Q. Had you any idea when you left home of coming here as a wit- ness?—A. No, not in the least. tº Q. Did you then know, by the way, that the Commission was in ses. Sion?—A. No, I did not know the first thing about it until Mr. Mackasey asked me my opinion on the matter; and that was before he spoke of the Commission. Q. He asked you your opinion ?–A. Yes; and what I thought about it from my experience. Q. Mr. Mackasey lives here ?—A. Yes. Q. And what did you tell him 3–A. I told him what I thought of the matter, as far as my experience went. Q. And then you came here 2–A. Yes. Q. HaS anything been said to you by any one requesting you to tes- tify to certain things, whether you believe them to be true or not ?—A. No, not in the least. - Q. Nothing of the sort has occurred ?–A. No. Q. And if any such thing has been said, you would have left the man that Said it at once?—A. Yes; it would have been useless to have said anything of the sort to me. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2497 NO. 53. THOMAS WARREN, of Deer Isle, Me., called on behalf of the Govern- ment of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Dana : * Question. Be so kind as to state your age.—Answer. Fifty-eight. Q. When did you first ; go fishing no matter as to the exact date 2—- A. About 1853. Q. In the gulf º–A. Yes. - Q. For what did you go; for mackerel, or cod, or both?—A. Mackerel. Q. The mackerel was rather a new thing then in the gulf?—A. Com- paratively ; yes. Q. How long were you engaged in fishing 2—A. That season 3 G Q. No ; I didn’t mean that season, but how many seasons did you go º–A.. I went five years in succession. Q. Into the gulf º–A. Yes. Q. Your last trip was in 737 or '38 as a fisherman 2–A. '37. Q. Where did you catch fish then } I don’t mean the place, but whether inshore or off shore ?—A. Do you refer to the first year 2 Q. To the first five years. You spoke of having been there from 733 to '37 ?—A.. I was there five years. Q. Without going into details, did you catch the fish you caught inshore or off shore, and in what proportion ?—A. It is a long time ago. I Only Speak from memory. In 1833 I was in a schooner named the Eagle. Q. That is so long ago that we don’t care much about the names, but only whether you can tell from memory whether those five years you caught off shore or inshore ?—A. In 1833 I was there for mackerel. Q. Can you tell how it was these five years, or, if you prefer, take each year 7—A. Well, three of the five years I was there for codfish. Q. Those were caught in deep water ?—A. Always. Q. Two years you were for mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. These two years, where did you catch 3—A. In 1833 we got them all off shore. In 1837, the last year I was there, we got 23 barrels out of our trip very near St. Peter's, within three miles of the shore. Q. You have no doubt they were within three miles of the shore?—A. I am clearly of the opinion that they were within three miles. Q. What was your whole trip 3—A. I don’t recollect, perhaps 200 barrels. The vessel was small. Q. Of those about 23 barrels were taken within three miles. After 1837 what did you do?—A. I never went a fishing voyage after '37. I retired from fishing and went into the fitting business. Q. That is, fitting fishermen 3–A. Yes. Q. How long were you engaged in that business %–A. About twenty- eight years, if I recollect aright. Q. You continued in that business until you were appointed inspector or afterwards?—A. My being appointed inspector did not interrupt my fishing business. Č. Q. When did you give up your business as an outfitter 2—A. In 1874. Q. Then from the time you gave up fishing, 1837 to 1874, you were engaged as outfitter of vessels?—A. Very slightly for the first four or five years. Q. After that more largely. Am I right 7–A. Yes. Q. How many years were you inspector in the State of Maine 7–A. I was appointed in 1862 and held office until '69. 157 F 2498 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Seven or eight years?—A. Seven years. Q. Did your duties as inspector of fish generally carry you over the fishing ports of the State, and to what extent?—A. Yes; I was in every fishing town once a year, and when complaints came, I was as often as they came. Q. What is the largest number of vessels you fitted for yourself any one year 7—A. In 1862, if I recollect aright, I fitted out twenty-two sail of mackerel for the Bay Chaleurs, or St. Lawrence rather. (We call it the Bay Chaleur.) Q. How many mackerel-men were fitted out from your place, Deer Isle, in former years—say from '60 to ’62%—A. In 1862 we had the largest number in the bay. Q. How many had you then }–A. 45 to 48. Q. How many are there now %–A. Well, I don't know that I can an- swer that question. From our town we have had about five in the bay. Q. Is the number of vessels in other fisheries about the same 3–A. No ; it has depreciated. There is not a quarter part of them. Q. When you had forty-five vessels, or from that to forty-eight, in 1862, what proportion of them went into the bay?—A. Nearly all. Q. This year you have five in the bay.?—A. Yes. Q. The year before, or the year before that, how was it?—A. Last year, for instance. e Q. How many were in the bay ?—A. As near as I can recollect, not ‘OIlê. - Q. Five tried this year * With what success, as they have been heard from ?–A. Well, they have all lost money. Q. Are you Well acquainted with Castine 3—A. I am. Q. Is that far from you ?—A. It is about fifteen miles to the north. Q. Has Castine engaged much in mackerel or cod 7–A. . It is largely engaged in cod, but of late years they have not done much in any kind of fish. & Q. How many fishermen do you suppose are fitted from Castine now %–A. Not a mackereler. Q. Take Camden; how many did they use to have and how many have they now %–A. Camden has always been a small fishing-place. About eight vessels, if I recollect. Q. Are there any now?—A. Yes, there are, but I guess there are only three now. Q. Are they in the bay ?—A. No, none in the bay. - Q. Take North EHaven?—A. Well, I guess they have had about ten there. Q. Any there now %–A. None. Q. Eastport; how many did they use to have?—A. When I first went there in 1862 they had eight mackerelers. Q. Are there any now in the bay ?—A. None—nowhere. Q. Now those various places in which the number of vessels that have gone in the bay have diminished to nothing, what are their ves- sels doing now, where they still own them —A. Fishing on the Ameri- can shore. They are divided between seining on the shore and Cod- fishing. Q. That leads me to ask you as to the condition of the mackerel-catch- ing on the shores of Maine. How is it, and how how has it been for the last eight or ten years 3–A. I don’t know that I understand. Q. The catch of mackerel on the shores of Maine; has it increased or diminished 3–A. It has decreased this year. - Q. I don’t mean this year particularly, but take the general run of AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2499 ten years past. How is the mackerel business of the coast compared with what it used to be?—A. My impression is there was as many mack- erel put up on the coast of Maine last year, 1876, perhaps as there ever was. I only speak from recollection. I know they were very plenty. Q. How is it as to summer-fishing grounds & Where are the Summer- fishing grounds 2—A. For mackerel ? I should think three-fourths of all the mackerel there is taken in the United States is taken on the Coast of Maine. - - Q. Now include in that the mackerel which are taken by your vessels in the bay.—A. What do you say? Q. Including the mackerel taken by your vessels in the bay, what proportion of all the mackerel taken, whether in the bay or on the coast, is taken on the American coast 2—A. What part of them ż Q. Yes; what proportion of the whole %–A. I don’t know. Q. Have you any means of forming a judgment?—A. No; but I think. the amount taken in the gulf is very small indeed compared with the mackerel packed in the States. Q. You should know. You have had a long experience as inspector and otherwise.—A. Do you speak of that period for which I was in-, spector 2 º Q. I mean to include the whole period while you were inspector or a observer of the matter as a merchant.—A. I should think from '62 to '69—during that period of time I should think there was more than 50 per Cent. of all the mackerel taken was taken in the Gulf of Saint Law- rence. I should think so. l Q. Since that time how has it been 2–A. It is all run down to a point almost. Everything has been taken this way. Q. You mean in Maine 7–A. Maine and Massachusetts. Q. Then what do you say of the bay-fishing now, its present condi- tion ? I don’t mean just to-day, but historically, taking the last ten years, five years, three years, two years, and so on. What condition is it in 3–A. Well, I should say it was worthless. You mean the St. Law- rence, do you? Well, I should say it was worthless. Q. And practically the people have so treated it 3–A. They have. Q. They have either gone out of the fishing or gone to other places?— A. They have gone seining on our shores. Q. When you seine on the American shores, how far do you go? What is the limit of your seining 2—A. Well, our folks rarely go outside of the Georges. In fact, they don’t go beyond that at all. Perhaps twenty miles from the shore would be the most common ground. All the way from Portland down to Mount Desert Rock. } Q. Then you would say between Georges and Mount Desert Rock was about the limit of your seining 2—A. Yes. Q. IS that business an increasing business?—A. It has depreciated a good deal this year. - Q. But within the last ten years it has been increasing ?—A. Yes, I guess it has been. I guess these last ten years it has been. Q. Now from 1854 to 1866 you recollect was the Reciprocity Treaty?— A. Yes. Q. During that time you had free scope fishing the gulf. You fished without respect to the three-mile line. Now, during that time When you had free access to the coast, was there any difference in the general result of the fisheries? Was it any more favorable to the people of the United States then 2–A. Well, the fishing was very good in the St. Lawrence until about the year 1868. - Q. Well, was it any more favorable? Was there any difference that 2500 AWARD JF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. you observed between the fishing at the time you had liberty to fish without respect to the three-mile limit and the time when there was an obstruction ?—A. Yes, sir. Since I was quite young and went there myself in 1837 I have always thought it an advantage to us, the fishing Within three miles. Q. How did that compare in your opinion with the advantage of hav- ing duties laid upon British fish coming into your markets?—A. I should say, taking the duties into consideration, reciprocity was always against us. - Q. Now you know the opinion of the fishing people in Maine. It has been your duty to examine and go to every town once a year. What was the general opinion you found among the fishermen and fish-deal- ers as to the benefit they got from the Reciprocity Treaty as fishermen, balancing the privilege of fishing inshore against the removal of the duties 2—A. Well, sir, I have spent a good deal of time, especially when I was inspector for the State, in trying to get at public opinion in those fishing towns. I have consulted a great many captains and owners of vessels. From 1860 to '63, '64, '65, and '66 there was not a great deal said about it, because the mackerel were plenty in the Gulf of St. Law- rence; but so far as I know for several years before the treaty was re- pealed they were very glad to see the time coming that we should be placed back where we were under the Treaty of 1818. The feeling was Strongly against reciprocity. Q. That is with reference to the fishery clauses of the treaty º—A, Yes; in reference to fish. I didn’t refer to anything else. Q. Do you say that from your observations and the experience you have had that there was a strong opinion among the people of Maine engaged in the fisheries"—A. Yes. Q. They preferred to go back to the arrangement by which they were excluded from the inshore grounds and had power to impose duties on British fish 7–A. Yes. \ Q. Well, from your whole experience down to within the last few years, is there much value in your judgment in the inshore fisheries, that is, within three miles 7–A. I think there is a value. Q. I asked if there was much 3—A. No ; I don’t think it is great; but I think there is a value in the inshore fisheries. Q. It is more for the boats than for vessels, is it not ? How is that?— A. I don’t know anything about boats. We only go there in vessels from 50 to 100 tons. There is a value and a fear. We were very glad }. Way When We had the privilege of buying licenses of the English Olks. Q. You are probably looking to a different point from that to which I directed you, but you may go on with reference to the apprehensions you used to have when it was not permitted to you to go within. What were they?—A. Well, there were a great many captains that had no interest in the Vessels, and they would seem to take risks that they ought not of fishing inshore. Somehow they seemed to have an impression that it was no harm to catch fish inshore if they were not caught. Q. Now, what other reasons influenced you besides the fear that the Captains would actually go inshore ?—A. Well, it was a great point to determine when a vessel was within three miles. There was nothing to indicate it, and it was a matter of judgment between the American ves- Sels and the cruisers. The vessels seemed to be apprehensive that they would be taken off three, four, five, or six miles. Q. Now, from your experience, is it, or is it not, difficult to determine from a vessel, especially when the shore is high, what distance you are AWARD OF THE FISHERY CuyMMISSION. 2501 off?—A. I think it is a very difficult thing indeed to determine just the distance from shore. Q. Now from which class of vessels—there were some naval vessels and those fitted out by the provinces—which class of vessels did you have trouble from ?—A. They were all called cutters in '37, if my mem- ory serves me right. Q. Do you know from what you learned whether there was any differ- ence in the treatment of the men and the liberties given to them, the degree of Severity practiced, as between officers of the regular navy and those of the cutters fitted out by the provinces 3–A. Well, I was not in the bay. When I was in the bay there were three sailing cutters. Of late years those captains seemed very exacting, but when the naval officers came they seemed to be more liberal and easy. They would go aboard and tell them what the regulations were, and leave documents with them, and advise them not to catch inside. Q. EIow was it with the captain of the Canadian cutters?—A. They were very arbitrary. ` Q. Were there frequent complaints?—A. Yes; I think so. I can’t say. I saw two vessels taken down at Margaree one morning—Glouces- ter vessels, I think. They made a great deal of trouble that day, but really at that time I could not see that the cutters were to blame. I saw the vessels taken. They were within three miles. Q. So far as position is concerned, the cutters were not in fault, but did you know anything about the conduct of the officers when they boarded them?—A. No; we were under sail, trying to get out of the way Of the Cutters. Q. What was done, and what the people complained of, you were not witness of 7–A. No. Q. Now I want to ask you, going back to the year 1837, was there any other difficulty with reference to the right to draw the lines from headland to headland ſº I don’t ask you whether you had this experi- ence yourself?—A. Well, I heard that matter freely discussed among the American fishermen, but I knew nothing of it. Q. You had no experience of it *—A. No. Q. But you heard it discussed ?–A. Yes. Q. As a question between them and the cutters ?—A. No, not to my knowledge. I have only been aboard vessels when they were telling about this, that, and the other thing being wrong, about the drawing of these lines from the headlands, and about the cutters exacting things that they ought not. Q. For what reason was it, when the licenses were at a low fee, that your people took them 2–A. For fear they would be seized. They knew, of course, that the three-mile limit, as it was understood, was an indefinite thing; it created a fear on the part of the captains that they might be innocently taken. Then again, as I have said, there were times when they were satisfied that the inside fisheries were valuable. Q. So it was partly the value of the privilege of being able to fish where they liked, and partly the fear of being taken when they ought not to be 3–A. Yes. • Q. Have you made any inquiries specifically as to the captures of those vessels and the rules laid down 2–A.. I have heard a great deal about it. Q. You have no statistics 2—A. No. By Mr. Weatherbe: Q. You were speaking of the lines drawn from headland to headland; What years did you refer to ?—A. I referred particularly to the year 2502 AWARD OF THF, FISHERY COMMISSION. 1837, and so in the year 1833, the two years I was mackerel-fishing in the gulf. Q. Well, you were not referring to any other years except those?—A. No, I never was there. - * Q. And you were only speaking of those years?—A. Yes, that is, in regard to the headland question. Q. But you spoke of the cutters being very exacting 2—A. Well, of course, I only spoke of what I heard aboard those vessels. I knew nothing about it. Q. You were just merely speaking of something you heard in 1837. A. Yes. Q. How often did you hear it that year?—A. Well, I was down there Quite late in the fall, and it was a subject of constant conversation on board our American vessels. Q. Don’t you think you are mistaken 3–A. About what % Q. How many cutters were there 7–A. Three I think. Q. Did you ever see any cutter there that year?—A. I saw them take those two Cape Ann vessels. I think it was 1837. I may be mis- taken as to the year. ſ Q. You only saw one. Yes. Q. How many did you say you saw 2–A. I saw three of them, I think it was, cruising in the bay that fall I was there last time. Q. Were they exacting to you?—A. No. * Q. They didn’t annoy you ?—A. No. Q. You didn’t fish inshore at all?—A. Yes, we did. I caught—that is, the vessel I was in—23 barrels. & Q. But you caught those in one day ?—A. Yes, one morning before breakfast. Q. All the rest you caught outside 3—A. Yes. Q. You never caught any except the 23 barrels of mackerel in- shore ?—A. That is all ever when I was engaged in the bay. Q. You caught these in the morning before breakfast 2—A. Yes. Q. You never tried to fish inshore any other time. You fished off- shore every other time except that?—A. I think so. Q. Was there a cutter in sight when you caught these ?—A. No, sir. If there had been we would not have been likely to catch them. , Q. You said you had an idea it was right 7–A. I was only speaking of the opinions of the captain's. Q. That was the only time you ran any risk?—A. Yes. We went off St. Peter's early in the morning and got becalmed. Q Q. That is the only time you run any risk *—A. Yes. Q. Where was that ?—A. Right off St. Peter's. Q. That was pretty good fishing. You had a pretty good time 2—A. Yes; that is the best fishing I ever saw in my life aboard a vessel. Q. One would wonder why you didn’t try it again 3–A. We didn't try it then. We were coming out of harbor and got becalmed, and the fish came up all around us solid, apparently, and just as soon as wind breezed up the fish all left us; but during this time we had 23 barrels. Q. Well, you never tried it again 3–A. I don’t recollect that we ever tried it again. N Q. The cutter never troubled or boarded you any time whatever ?—A. O. Q. From what experience you have had, your own personal experience, the best fishing is inside º–A. Within three miles? Q. Certainly.—A. Well, no. Q. You never saw anything better than that catch of 23 barrels for AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2503 the time, and that is the only time you tried?—A. We were surrounded by hundreds of vessels. Q. But, looking to your own personal experience, the best fishing there that you knew was within three miles 2—A. Yes; well, I never Saw 23 barrels caught, that I recollect, so quickly as we caught them that morning. - Q. And you never tried it any other time? (No answer.) Mr. TRESCOT. Did he understand your question ? * WEATHERBE. Did you understand 2–A. Yes; I believe I under- Stand. Q. Then, with regard to the value of the inshore fisheries in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, you have no personal knowledge later than 1837 ?—A. No practical knowledge. Q. But since that I understood you to say you had acquired knowl- edge by procuring information ?—A. I commenced when I was done fishing to fit out vessels. Q. Have you ever acquired any knowledge from others with regard to the value of the inshore fisheries since 1837?—A. I have invariably Consulted all my captains. Q. You recollect when the agitation was going on in regard to the Reciprocity Treaty in 1852 in your State %–A. Yes; in 1854. We were, down to that, against it. Q. I suppose you are acquainted with Senator Hamlin 7–A. Yes; and with Mr. Pyke, too. He voted against it. I circulated a petition. Q. I am asking you with reference to Senator Hamlin. He took an interest in this question of the fisheries, did he not ?—A. Yes; but I have really forgotten about it. Q. You yourself, in 1852, did not consider the fisheries of the gulf of any value, I think º–A. In 1852 * I always considered them of Some Value. * * Q. How much value? In 1852–54, for instance.—A. Well, I don’t know any distinction, since I went fishing, in the value of the inshore fisheries. Q. Now, you are here as officer of the government in the State of Maine, having collected statistics, and you have brought a book full of statistics, I suppose?—A. You said I came on purpose for this examina- tion. I had a dispatch, and a very few moments after I got the dispatch I came unprepared. Q. What I said was that you had collected statistics. It was known. you had collected statistics. It was known you were a man likely to be well acquainted with the subject. Now, I want to ask you whether it, was considered in the State of Maine in 1852, 1853, 1854, or any of those years, that the inshore fisheries were of a great deal of value º–A. Well, So far as I know, although I had not at that time traveled over the State of Maine, I probably got hold of the opinion of our fishing communities and towns, from Portsmouth to Eastport, and they were opposed to the opening of our markets to foreign fish, or, in other words to the Reci- procity Treaty. * Q. What I want to get at is this, whether the general feeling in that State was opposed to it, or whether the people were generally of the opinion that the inshore fisheries of the Gulf of St. Lawrence were of very little use to you. Tell us that ?—A. So far as I know ever since I can recollect having anything to do in Bay Chaleurs they always were frightened at this three-mile restriction. ; - Q. You certainly understand my question. Were your fisherman of 2504 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. the opinion that the three-mile inshore fisheries of the gulf were of use to them or not ?—A.. I think they considered them of considerable value. Q. You think they did Ž–A. Yes. Q. Did that opinion continue, or, if not, when did the opinion change? —A. I don’t know that that opinion has ever changed. . Q. Let me read you just a few lines from the remarks of Senator Ham- lin. I suppose you are a supporter of his, that you have been, and are at this time 2—A. Yes. Q. He is a very able man 7–A. He is said to be. Q. After describing the magnitude and importance of the American fisheries “as the great fountains of commercial prosperity and naval power,” he declared that “if American fisherman were kept out of these inshore waters, the immense amount of property thus invested would become useless, and leave them in want and beggary, or in prison in foreign jails.”—A. That was in 1852. That was from headland to head- Tand. Q. Now my impression was that they were discussing the question irrespective of the headland question. They were discussing the ques- tion whether the fish were not caught within three miles of the shore. Mr. DANA. It may save you the trouble of examining if I state the known fact which cannot affect the witness' mind, that that speech was made while Great Britain claimed the whole Bay of Fundy and all these: bays. Mr. WEATHERBE. He was arguing in favor of reciprocity. (To the witness.) Are you acquainted with Mr. Scudder, of Massachusetts 3– A. No. Q. Mr. Scudder, of Massachusetts, said, referring to the mackerel: These fish are taken in the waters nearer to the coast than the codfish are. A con- siderable portion—from one-third to one-half—are taken on the coasts and in the bays and gulfs of the British provinces. The inhabitants of the provinces take many of them in boats and with seines. The boat and Seine fishery is the more successful and pro- fitable, and would be pursued by our fishermen were it not for the stipulations of the Gonvention of 1818, between the United States and Great Britain; by which it is con- tended that all the fisheries within three miles of the coast, with few unimportant ex- ceptions, are secured to the provinces alone. Mr. Tuck, of New Hampshire, said: 'This inshore fishery, which we have renounced, is of great value, and extremely important to American fishermen. From the first of September to the close of the season, the mackerel run near the shore, and it is next to impossible for our vessels to obtain fares without taking fish within the prohibited limits. The truth is, our fishermen need absolutely and must have the thousands of miles of shore fishery which they have re- Inounced, or they must always do an uncertain business. If our mackerel men are pro- hibited from going within three miles of the shore, and are forcibly kept away (and nothing but force will do it), then they may as well give up their business first as last. It Will be always uncertain. That was correct at that time 2—A. No; Mr. Tuck never went fishing there. Q. I don’t suppose Senator Hamlin did either?—A. No. Q. Were these opinions correct or not ?—A. I guess not. Q. They didn’t represent the popular view 2–A. I guess they were discussing the agitated question of the line from headland to headland. Q. I will have to read it again. “The truth is, our fishermen need absolutely and must have the thousands of miles of inshore fishery which they have renounced, or they must always do an uncertain business.”— A. I understand perfectly. The idea of Mr. Tuck is that, because ves- Sels are excluded from three miles, it must make the business uncertain. Q. Do you think it was a profitable business outside in the gulf at that time, if they were excluded from within three miles?—A. It was a profitable business. It was so in 1852, and it continued so until 1868. Q. If the American fishermen had been excluded by force, rigidly, AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2505 from within three miles of the shore, it would have been a profitable business from 1854 to 1868?–A. Yes; the mackerel have been drop- ping off since as early as 1866. Since the period I have mentioned it has not been profitable anywhere. Q. Was that true at that time—that which I have read º–A. I guess it wants to be qualified some. - - Q. Nobody seems to have controverted it in Congress %–A. If that refers strictly to within three miles of the shore, they attach more con- Sequence to that three-mile restriction than the fishermen generally do. Q. You said Senator EHamlin was a popular man. Didn’t he repre- Sent the fishermen’s views at that time 2—A. I suppose he thought he Wà S. Q. Are you able to state that he did not ?—A. What do you say ? Q. What great authority can you give us now that took a different View of the case at that time?—A. I say he attaches a greater conse- Quence to it than the fishermen generally. Q. Give me the name of any man of eminence.—A. I should very much rather have an opinion on that question from practical mackerel- men than from the honorable EIannibal Hamlin. Q. Can you give me the opinion of practical mackerel-men obtained at that time?—A. I have seen them since I came to Halifax. I have Conversed with a great many that know more about the fisheries than ever he did. - Q. Your own experience that morning exactly coincides with Senator Hamlin's views 2—A. Yes. Q. Well, now I ask you if you can give me the name of any practical mackerel-man who understood the question in 1852, and who would differ from Senator Hamlin 3–A. I recollect that there was that con- troversy, since you have brought it up, but it has left my mind, and perhaps I never should have thought of it unless you had brought it up. t Q. What was the feeling of your best fishermen 7–A.. I am unable O Say. Q. But what their feelings are now, that we claim money, you are able to Say?—A. Are you claiming money; is that so º Q. You know that, don’t you ?—A. Well, I have heard something º money compensation, but I didn’t know you were sincere in it, really. Q. You think this is a farce?—A. I believe every word you say. Q. I ask you whether you were not aware that the proceedings under Which you were produced here were in consequence of a claim on the part of Great Britain for money 3–A. Well, I recollect it has been talked of that you claimed money. Q. Did you know you were brought as a witness to give evidence to resist it 3–A. I know I came here to testify what I knew of the fishing in the bay. Q. Did you know that the parties who brought you here were resist- ing a claim for money 2—A. No; I did not. Q: Do you know the provisions of the Washington Treaty with regard to the fisheries?—A. Well, the main part of the Washington Treaty I Suppose I do know. I know we have a right of fishing inshore. Is not. that correct 2 - Q. Certainly.—A. And I thought that the Englishmen thought the free fishing on our coast was insufficient to compensate you for our privi- lege of fishing inshore, and you wanted so much money on top of that. I never knew there was any sum or anything of that kind. 2506 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. You did understand the question ?—A. I understood at the time it passed, but how many years is it since it passed ? - Q. Well, never mind. What did you suppose this Commission was for 3–A. I haven’t thought of it for years. Q. You didn’t know we were trying that very question now %—A.. I did. - - º Q. You gave your evidence with that knowledge?—A. Yes. Q. You think now that the value of the inshore fishery has changed ?— A. No ; I have the same opinion that I have always had. I have said all through that they were valuable to us. Q. Now with regard to the right of carrying our fish free into the United States, I suppose you think that is of no advantage to your fisher- men, that provision of the treaty º–A. I have no idea it is any advantage to our side of the house. i - Q. It is a disadvantage, isn’t it?—A. Yes; it is against us. Q. Be kind enough to explain how %–A. Well, all these things seem ‘to me to be regulated by supply and demand. If there is 100,000 bar- rels of mackerel hove into our market on top of what we produce the tendency is to depreciate prices. Q. If this provision of the treaty increases the supply of mackerel in the United States market it will bring down the price of fish 7–A. State that again. (Question repeated.)—A. I think it would have that tendency. Q. That is the reason you think it is no advantage to your fisher- men to have the privilege of fishing inside 3—A. No ; putting both pro- visions of the treaty together, it is no advantage, because the supply is increased and the prices are depreciated. Q. You will admit this, that it is an advantage to the consumers by bringing down the price 3 You will admit that ?—A. Yes. Q. Then in point of fact it gives you cheap fish?—A. The tendency is to cheapen them. * Q. For the people of the United States?—A. Yes. NO. 54. WILFORD J. FISHER, of Eastport, Me., called on behalf of the Gov- ernment of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Trescot: Question. Of what place are you a native 3–Answer. Grand Manan. Q. How old are you ?—A. Fifty-six. Q. Where do you live now %–A. At Eastport, Me. Q. How old were you when you moved to Eastport 3–A. I could no tell you without thinking. + Q. You are fifty-six years old now. How long have you lived at JEastport 3–A. Since 1845. - - Q. What is your present occupation at Eastport?—A. I am agent of an express company, and am doing a general commission business. Q. How long have you been doing that ?—A. For the last six years. Q. Do you recollect how old you were when you left Grand Manan and went to Eastport?—A. I left Grand Manan when I was twenty-two years of age. Q. While you lived on Grand Manan what was your occupation?—A. My father kept an extensive fishing establishment and was fitting out fishing vessels. I worked with him until I was twenty-one or twenty- two years of age. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2507 Q. Describe to the Commission what sort of business you were engaged in While assisting your father in this business?—A. Our business was fitting out fishermen, curing fish, drying fish, and marketing them after I got old enough. & Q. You were engaged in that until you were twenty-two?—A. Yes. Q. About what time did you go into your father's business? Early 2– A. I used to go to school in the day-time and work in the fish-yard night and morning before and after school. As I got older I took more charge of the business. Q. As I understand you the time you left school and went into the establishment entirely you were twenty-one years old and were in charge of the Whole department of fitting vessels, dealing with the fish, taking them to market included ?–A. Yes. - Q. Well, after that what did you do?—A. After that I went to sea for two years. * Q. What do you mean when you say you went to sea; did you go as a fisherman 3–A. No ; I went in a merchant vessel. - Q. Your father's vessel ?—A. No ; in an American vessel. Q. After that ?—A. After that I brought up in Eastport and went into business. - Q. What sort of business at Eastport 2—A. Fitting out fishermen and general business, curing fish, and trading in West India produce, and all kinds of business done by our general stores. Q. How long did that continue 3—A. 15 years. Q. What did you do after that ?—A. I went to Grand Manan again and Weir-fished for 8 or 10 years. About that time I commenced to make herring oil. I had weirs at Grand Manan, and went over and en- gaged in the manufacture of herring oil and smoking herring. s Q. How long did you remain at Grand Manan 3–A. 8 or 9 years, I think ; I made no calculation and should not like to state exactly. Some- Where about that time. - Q. Well, after you went to Grand Manan did you return to East- port"—A. Yes. - Q. You have been ever since at Eastport 2—A. Yes. Q. What business have you been in since 2—A. Express and general Commission business. I have been buying hake-sounds for parties in Boston. Q. As I understood, when you went back to Grand Manan you were doing a weir business º–A. Yes, sir. Q. What have you done with them?—A. I have them still. Q. Do you work them yourself?—A. No ; I rent them. Q. You have been renting them ever since 3—A. I have been renting them the last six years. Sometimes I rent them for an annual payment for the privilege, and some of the weirs I rent on a fifth, building the weirs myself. In other cases I make a trade with them to build the weirs for So much, and give me so much net proceeds. I make the best trade I -C8, Il. Q. How many weirs are you interested in ?—A. Three large weirs. One we didn’t build this year. Only two were built this year, on ac- Count of the smoked herring being very low. Q. Are you still employed in smoking herring and curing them 3– A. Yes; in the way I have stated. & " Q. I want you to explain to the Commission the character of the busi- neSS done at the Weirs. What force have you employed there?—A. Well, the weirs are built in the eddies, places where the herring fre- quent. They are caught in the weirs, The weirs are built so that the 2508 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. tide never leaves them. We are obliged to do that so as not to destroy the herring, to have none die in the weirs. They have a large gate Which takes boats 12 feet wide and we take them in masts and all. We can open it twelve feet wide the whole height of the Weir so that the boat comes in without stepping the masts. We seine the herring that are in the weir and put them in the boats, then take them ashore and Wash them out, scale them and string them on Sticks and put them in the smoke-house, smoke them and box them. After being boxed we sell them wherever we can get most money for them. Q. What force have you employed in those weirs?—A. When I fished there myself I had five to twelve men according to the season. Some months we are obliged to employ more men than others. Q. On each weir 2–A. No ; that would be what we call a gang. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. How many men are required to manage one weir 2—A, Twelve men to manage one Weir. Q. It would take twelve men 2–A. Yes; that would be for two or three months; that is all. By Mr. Trescot: Q. What months?—A. October has usually been the best month for the last two years. Six or eight years ago we used to catch them even earlier in the season. Sometimes We got a heavy haul of herring in April. Last year we got a very heavy catch in April. Q. Then it comes in the fall again?—A. Yes; they come towards fall again. They vary with the seasons on account of the weather or some Other cause we can’t control. They are about sure to come within a month or six weeks. • { Q. Can you tell the Commissioners what is the proportion, as far as catching herring is concerned, in Grand Manan of the weir fishery to the sea fishery 3 Could you form any idea at all?—A. I don’t know that I understand the question. You mean the proportion of herring caught in Weir to the proportion caught in nets? - Q. Yes; at Sea in nets and boats. Mr. THOMSON. What do you mean by at sea 7 Mr. TRESCOT. I mean the proportion caught in weirs as compared with those not so caught. I don’t care whether inshore or out.—A. There is none of the class we catch in weirs but very few that are caught in boats. The herring We Smoke are smaller than these caught in nets and boats. Q. Then the smoked herring are essentially from weirfi-shing?—A. Yes; exclusively so, except as to a few large herring smoked late in the year, or partly smoked, that they call bloaters. -- Q. The herring fishery at Grand Manan consists of different classes of fish. There is the smoked herring, that is one class?—A. Yes. Q. What others ?—A. The other business is to catch them in nets for bait to catch line fish with, and another business is to catch them in nets to freeze them and sell them fresh for food. There is a very few people who follow the catching of herring to pack in barrels of salt because the market has been so dull. It is not followed much and has not been for a number of years to any extent. It is followed some, but not to the extent it used to be. Q. Now what are pickled herring ?–A. They are herring caught in nets, put in barrels, and sold as pickled herring. Q. They are the same kind that are caught and frozen, but not the Same kind that are smoked ?–A. Just so. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2509 Q. Then you have the smoked herring, the fresh herring caught for bait ; the herring that is caught and frozen for bait and food, and the pickled herring, which you say is a very small proportion of the busi- ness; So I understand you?—A. You understand pretty nearly. But the freezing of the herring for food can only be done in cold weather, so that if the Weather is not cold enough some of that is pickled, but not much is pickled otherwise, as the salt and barrels are an expense. TUESDAY, October 1, 1877. The Commission met. Examination of WILFORD J. FISHER continued. By Mr. Trescot: Question. When you closed yesterday, you had described the Way of fishing to the Commissioners, and stated that the Smoked-herring fishery at Grand Manan was almost essentially a Weir-fishery ; can you give the Commission any idea of what the amount of smoked-herring business is at Grand Manan 3—Answer. I estimate the amount of Smoked her- ring cured at Grand Manan at 400,000 boxes. Q. Annually 3—A. Yes; annually. Q. Where is the market for these smoked herring 2—A. In the United States almost altogether. - Q. These herring are shipped directly from the Island of Grand Manan 3–A. They are now, under the present arrangements, under the treaty. Q. In what are they shipped ? In American vessels or by parties in the island 3—A. There are four English vessels that have been running in, one from New York and three to Boston. These vessels are owned by people at Grand Manan. Then there are occasionally other vessels chartered to load herring for Boston. Q. Do I understand by that that they are chartered by Grand Manan people?—A. Yes. Q. What vessels are these generally 7–A. Just such Vessels as they can pick up. It does not make any difference as to the character of the vessels running from Grand Manan to New York or Boston. Either English or American vessels can go. - Q. You say there are four vessels owned by people in Grand Manan in which they ship smoked herring to Boston and New York 2–A. Yes; a large part of them ; and a large part of them are sold at Eastport. Q. Mostly caught in weirs 2—A. Altogether in weirs. Q. Then there would be no portion that would be caught by Ameri- cans ?—A. No ; unless they went there and leased part of the weir. Q. It is all a Grand Manan fishery essentially; the cargo is shipped in Grand Manan vessels and shipped by the people of Grand Manan"— A. Yes; in addition to the smoked herring business at Grand Manan, the island of Campobello smokes, I should think, 250,000 boxes; Indian Island, Deer Island, and the rest of the small islands around the imme- diate vicinity about 50,000 more. I should say there were 700,000 boxes of Smoked horring cured in our immediate vicinity on these British islands. - Q. These fisheries at Campobello, Deer Island, and the neighboring islands are all fisheries of the natives of those islands?—A. Yes. Q. Now with regard to the frozen and pickled herring, what Sort of a business is done at Grand Manan and the islands adjacent, to the best of your knowledge, in that article?—A. The frozen herring and pickled herring are the same herring, caught in the same way and by the same 2510 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. men. The frozen herring business can only be carried on in the winter when the weather is cold. If a man sets his net for bait and gets more herring than he wants to use, he salts them in barrels; that is the only Way he can utilize them at this time. In the winter season they fit out exclusively for this frozen herring business, but there are times in the Winter Season when thaws come on and soft weather; then, if a man sets his nets out and catches fish, he can’t freeze them, and he then pickles them in barrels. But there is no way they can make so much money out of herring as freezing them and selling them in a frozen state; it requires no barrels and no salt, and the outlay is labor altogether. Q. Well, by whom is the catching of herring for the purpose of freez. ing Conducted generally 3–A. Mostly altogether in our vicinity by Do- minion fishermen. There is a small number of fishermen at Eastport that, when there is no herring there, would go down to Letite and Back Bay, and amongst the islands; but the number of Dominion fishermen is very small. Q. What is the proportion of the foreign fishing compared with that of the natives at Grand Manan 7–A. I think Eastport does not send 25 boats or vessels in the frozen-herring business on the shores of the Do- minion of Canada. Perhaps in relation to that I had better state a cir- Cumstance: there are a good many people living at Eastport who are British Subjects; they have British vessels; they fish in British vessels. On the other hand, there is a number of American vessels that have been Owned and are owned at Deer Island and other places on the Dominion Side, that are owned and sailed by Dominion men, but still are under American register; they have never been transferred. But the number of Americans who leave our place to go fishing for frozen herring is Comparatively small in proportion to the whole number engaged in the business. Q. What is done with these frozen herring, are they shipped ?–A. Yes, sir. There is a good many of these bought at Eastport by the people there who engage in that business, and are shipped on the steamer to Boston. But a large quantity is sold to American vessels that go there and buy them. Q. For the purpose of bait 3–A. No ; mostly for food. I should sup- pose those that come for bait only take small quantities. Those that Come from Gloucester carry away full loads. Q. Well, besides these two herring fisheries, what are the fisheries around Grand Manan 2–A. The fishing around Grand Manan is codfish, pollock, haddock, and hake. - Q. Are these fisheries within three miles of the shore or off shore?—— A. Some are within three miles. Q. Which 3 Tell the Commissioners where the fisheries are, as a rule.—A. There is a time early in the spring and late in the fall when the fish come in close to the shores at Grand Manan, codfish and haddock principally. The haddock around Grand Manan is caught inshore mostly altogether—mostly within the three-mile limit. The pollock and Codfish are mostly caught outside of the three-mile limit. Gravelly ground is a great place for pollock, and that, in my judgment, is without the limit. The hake fishing, since trawling has commenced, they have gone off shore. It was alway's supposed that you had to get a muddy bottom to catch hake. This trawling business has brought up a new idea, and the fishermen have found their best hake last year and this year on hard bottom between Campobello and Grand Manan in deep Water—larger fish and more of them—and the fleet of vessels that have followed hake fishing this year have most all exclusively confined AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 251 tº themselves to that fishing-ground which I consider without the three miles. Q. Of these four fisheries, hake, haddock, pollock, and cod, what is. the respective value 2 I mean as fisheries.—A. The quantity of hake, and their value, I could give you very near, but the others would be, of course, moreliable not to be correct. I am largely engaged in the Sound business. The quintal of hake makes one and a quarter pounds of sounds, and it is not only my business to know what sounds I buy my- self, but how much are brought in the neighborhood, and whose hands. they go into. This year the hake business has been larger than any year since my remembrance. “s, Q. This year, I understand, it has been offshore?—A. Yes, a very large catch. I estimate the quantity of sounds this year in our district, Including in that Grand Manan and everything from Point Lepreau, 33,000 pounds. Perhaps it may be more, 1,000 pounds over. It will not, I think, go under. By taking a quarter from that you have the quantity of hake caught. Now, last year we didn’t get quite ten tons of Sounds altogether in the whole district. Q. What I want to get at is this: What is the relative proportion that the hake fishing bears to the haddock, cod, or pollock 2 Which is the most valuable, I mean generally 7–A. The inshore or offshore ? Q. Take it altogether, and then I will ask you separately. Is the had- dock offshore or inshore ?—A. It is offshore and inshore. Q. How about the pollock 3–A. The pollock is caught more offshore than in. Q. Then the codfish 2–A. The codfish are almost exclusively caught offshore, except, as I tell you, in the early spring or late in the fall there is a school of small codfish that strikes within the limits, and the people there catch them more or less. Q. Then, as I understand, generally the codfish is an offshore fishery —the valuable codfish 3—A. Yes. Q. The hakei S offshore also 3–A. Yes. Q. The pollock is also offshore ?—A. Yes. Q. And the haddock is inshore and offshore?—A. Yes, but under- stand me, I don’t say there is not a few hake, pollock, and cod inshore. Q. I mean generally. Now of these four which is the most valuable % —A. At Grand Manan this year the hake fishery is the most valuable by far. At Campobello the hake offshore is most valuable. Q. Now, by whom are these fisheries mainly conducted at Grand Manan 3–A. They are conducted by the inhabitants of Grand Manan. Q. Is there a large proportion of American fishermen engaged in these fisheries within your knowledge º–A. I know of Americans who go there and hire by the month to the weir fishermen. Q. No, I am talking about the American boats and vessels?—A. The Quantity of American boats and vessels that go there to fish inside is very small, very small indeed. Q. Could you form any estimate what would be the annual value of the fishery at Grand Manan, taking the opposite coast, and taking the neighborhood generally, from your experience as a man of business. with some practical acquaintance With the Operations yourself as a mer- chant; what would be the annual value, including Grand Manan and the coast from Letite to St. Andrews and Lepreau º–A. I should set the value of the fish caught at Grand Manan at not over $400,000. They might go $500,000, but I think if I had $500,000 I would have some left. Q. That is for Grand Manan. Now for the coast on the Other side.— 2512 AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. A. From Point Lepreau to St. Andrews and all the islands connected, including Campobello, I should put less than a million. It is a pretty hard thing to estimate, but I should say considerably less than a mill- ion, with everything included—herring, oil, the fish-tummies, smoked herring, hake sounds, and the fish themselves. Q. That excludes Grand Manan 3–A. Yes; I put down Grand Manan at $400,000, and all the other places around our vicinity at not over a million. Q. Now, I will read some questions put to and answers made by a gentleman supposed to be familiar with that portion of the fisheries, and without asking you to contradict him, I want to ask you how far your judgment agrees with his. I refer to the evidence of James Maclean, merchant, Letite, parish of St. George, Charlotte County, New Bruns- wick; do you know him º–A. Very well; I am very intimate with him. Q. These are the questions and answers, if you will attend to them : Q. Judging from your practical knowledge of the fishery, being an owner of vessels, and dealing with the men who fish as you do, what do you say, at a low figure, would be the value of the fisheries and the actual worth of the fish caught by British subjects between the points you mention from Lepreau to Letite; what would be a fair aver- age value from 1871 ?—A. I should estimate the quantity for Charlotte County and the adjoining islands. We all fish, and it would be difficult to separate the two. Q. You are acquainted with the value of the islands as well?—A. Yes; I visit Grand Manan occasionally, and the adjoining islands often. Q. What is the catch of the whole 2–A. A low estimate for our fishing would be $1,000,000 for each year. Q. For British subjects?—A. Yes. Q. That is a low estimate 3—A. I think I am under the mark; in fact, I have no doubt of it at all. Q. And it may be a good deal more ?—A. Yes. Q. You have not a shadow of a doubt that it is at least a million ?—A. No. Q. And Our American friends take a considerable amount more ?—A. They take as many. Q. They have more men and more vessels?—A. Yes. Q. And they take at least as much 3–A. Yes, fully as much as we do, if not more. Q. Have you any doubt that they take more ?—A. I believe that they take more. Q. You have no doubt of it 3–A. No. Q. With your knowledge, would you say that was an accurate state- ment of the fishing between Letite and Lepreau ?—A. I shall not alter my estimate by hearing that. . Q. Do you know of any American vessels engaged in these waters, in those fisheries, taking anything like an approximate amount of a mill- ion ?—A. No ; it is impossible. It is erroneous. The imports of the country would not show it, and cannot show it ; it is impossible. Q. Now, here is from another witness whom you may know also, Walter B. McLaughlan, light-house keeper and fishery-overseer at Grand Manan, in the county of Charlotte, New Brunswick 3–A. I have known him from a boy. . Q. (Reads:) - Q. You are well acquainted with the fisheries of Charlotte County; take the main- land fishing from Letite as far as Lepreau, is that a good fishing ground 3–A. It is con- sidered a good fishing ground; I am not personally acquainted with it, and can only say from what I have heard. My duties have never carried me there. Q. But your practical knowledge extends there ?—A. Yes. Q. What would be the value of the mainland fishery, the British fishery alone, tak- ing it from Letite to Lepreau ?—A. My own fishery is, say, $500,000; Campobello and West Isles must equal mine, and the mainland will certainly be more than half of that, if not equal to it. Q. Well, then, you put Campobello and West Isles as about equal to Grand Manan 3– A. Yes; speaking as I do. Not knowing exactly, I should say so. * Q. That would be a half a million for these two islands, and a half a million for Grand Manan, that makes a million, and you think the mainland is half as much as either of those; that would be a fairãestimate for the mainland 7–A. Yes; Charlotte AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2513 County is a very important fishing county. In 1861 I was a census enumerator, and I think the result of the fishing in that county nearly equalled that of all the other fish- eries of the province, with the exception of St. John County. Q. You put half a million as the catch of the British fishermen on the mainland for the year, and, in your judgment, the American catch is the same 2—A. All I can judge is by what I hear; they come down in their vessels; I think they have their own way on the North Shore, very much more than on Grand Manan. I have a great deal of trouble with them there. But on the North Shore I think they have things pretty much as they want. I would say that they probably surpass our own catch. Now does your judgment conform with that statement 7–A. If I heard that correctly, he estimates Grand Manan at $500,000, and Campobello and the adjacent islands $500,000, and half a million for the mainland. Q. If he means that the mainland is half of Campobello and West, Isles, it would be only $250,000 %–A. He is under my estimate, but I should not alter my estimate. Q. You put half a million for the mainland for a year } You don’t agree with him?—A. No ; I think he should have added $250,000 more. Q. Now he is asked if, in his judgment, the American catch is the same as the British, and answers, “All I can judge by is what I hear. They come down in their vessels. I think they have their Own Way On the North shore very much more than at Grand Manan.” Have you any idea that that is correct 7–A. No. As I have said before, of that amount caught there there is not one-fifth that is caught by Amer- icans. I would be safe in saying less. º Q. At page 256 he is asked by Mr. Foster what he includes in the mainland. Mr. Thomson answers, “From Point Lepreau to Letite;” and the witness says, “From Point Lepreau to St. Andrew’s.” Then the Question is asked, “You make one million and a half taken by Ameri- cans and the same by British fishermen,” and the answer is yes; and then he answers in the affirmative to the question whether that is a low estimate.—A. That is where we differ. I say that of one and a half million taken, not more that one-fifth of that quantity may be taken by American fishermen. That includes off shore and inshore. Q. You have been living in Eastport of late years 3–A. Yes. Q. And you know the neighborhood of Eastport, Lubec, and Cut- ler?—A. Yes, very Well, indeed. Q. Now, we bave been told, although I can’t find the evidence—what are the occupations of those places 7–A. Eastport is what you would call a fitting village or town, or whatever you may call it—about 4,000 population. The merchants there fit out fishermen, but those fishermen that they fit out are the same men that come up from those islands— they come up to Eastport and fit out there to prosecute this fishery on the North shore, at Grand Manan, and other places in the Bay of Fundy. The amount of American vessels fitted from Eastport in the fishery business is very small, and it is decreasing every year, because it has not been a paying business. Then Eastport sends a number of vessels to the Magdalen Islands in the spring for herring. That has been here- tofore quite a business with us, and is still followed up. Not so much this last year as formerly, because year before last they lost a great deal of money by the Magdalen herring, on account of the price of smoked Magdalen herring declining very much in the market. A good many people kept Magdalen herring lying in the smoke-house until this year. They didn’t sell them until this year. Then there is a certain number of small boats and vessels which don’t exceed 25 at the outside, in my estimation, that fit out for this fishery; that is, hake fishing and frozen herring off shore. That is about the extent at Eastport. Then 158 F 2514 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Lubec, which is in the same district as Eastport, I think fits six vessels, with which they fish exclusively on the Bank. They don’t fish on the inshore ground. I could name these vessels, but I didn’t bring any list. Then Lemoine, in Maine, has had at Grand Manan this year, fishing, three vessels. They fish without the limits. What we call Lubec Narrows has had one. Cutler has had two. At Pembroke, Perry, and all these places the people are not fishermen. They don’t go fishing. They may take a boat when the pollack is in, in the summer, and go down one or two days, and catch a few fish to take home for the winter's use, but they don’t make a practice of fishing and they have not. Q. This question was asked Mr. Maclelan : “Along that coast, from Eastport and Lubec toward Mount Desert, are there not great numbers of fishing villages that depend upon fishing for a living 3' And the answer was : “They are about the same as our own ; they live on coast- ing, fishing, farming, lumbering, and so on, just exactly as ours do. I know no difference between them.” Then the question was asked : “Without our fisheries could they live by fishing 2" And the answer was: “No ; because if they could they would not come to our fisheries. They would not come so far away. They do not have fisheries of their own.” Now, of course, without the fisheries they could not live by fish- ing; but do you know of any community from Eastport to Mount Desert that depends upon fishing, and that would be compelled to go over to Grand Manan waters to fish 7—A. No ; not for the last twenty years. As I tell you, Lemoine had this year three vessels; last year it had two. They used to have eight or ten thirty years ago. And these men have gone into the Bank fishing to Grand Bank. This year there are only three that have favored the Bay of Fundy fishing, and they fish on the Grand Manan Bank, at a place which is outside the limits. Q. In your experience in the smoked-herring business could the busi- ness sustain a duty of a dollar a barrel ?—A. Well, it has always been by the box. I think the old duty was five cents a bag. Q. If that duty were reimposed what would be the effect 2—A. The people would have to stop smoking them now. Q. How is it about the accuracy of this statement, according to your judgment : “Q. Now, taking Grand Manan, judging by the re- turns that the fishermen give you, can you tell us what each family makes by fishing 7 Do you know that from statements of their own, or from personal observation ?—A.. I think $1,000 a year would be the utmost each would make. I don’t mean clear; they certainly would not clear that”?—A. I should think that was large. Still, as I don’t visit Grand Manan, and I don’t know how the people live there now, I should rather not answer as to that. Q. What would you estimate to be the money-value of the fish that the average fisherman would catch there in a year 7—A. They would have to be divided into a good many classes—the weir-fishermen, the hake-fishermen, and the people of Grand Manan farm a good deal in connection with their fishing. They all raise their own potatoes, and have cows, and are well to do. It would be a pretty hard thing for me to State. By Mr. Foster: Q. Did you ever know a fisherman who prosecuted that business for a living and got rich 3—A. Some I know of since we had reciprocity, both at Grand Manan and Deer Island, who went into the smoked- herring and herring-oil business that are very well off. Q. Well, that is business %–A. Yes, sir; but I never knew a man AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2515 who hauled the fish out of the water with his hands line-fishing that ever got rich. Q. You have never known one that laid up money?—A. No ; not in that business alone. Q. Have you an opinion as to the effect of throwing gurry over on the fishing grounds?—A. That has been talked over among the fishermen for the last 40 years. I have somewhat changed my mind in regard to it. We used to think once it was a great injury, but I have about made up my mind that this gurry is devoured by sea-fleas, star-fish, and other insects that inhabit the water, and that it is not so great an injury as we have heretofore thought it. I have no doubt that the gurry thrown Overboard will attract dog-fish, cat-fish, skates, and that kind of fish in large numbers while it lasts, but I don’t think it injures the fishing grounds to the extent supposed. Q. Do you think the effect would last from one season to another ?— A. No. Q. What do you say about the effect of trawling %–A. I think trawl- ing is an injury to the fish, inasmuch as trawls set in the mouth of the bay will catch the mother fish as they come in to spawn. And I think they are an injury so far as they catch these mother fish. I don’t think the trawls frighten the fish or drive them out, but I think they catch the mother fish as they come in to spawn, and thereby decrease the Quantity. - & Q. You speak of the mouths of the bays. Would it be the case off the coast on the Banks 7–A. It would not do so much injury there. I don’t know that it would do any injury there at all. It would only be an injury On Spawning grounds or in the road—set in the road where the fish come in to spawn. * Q. On the spawning grounds or at the mouth of a bay of moderate size 3—A. On the spawning grounds or in the road that the fish take to the Spawning grounds, it would be an injury. By Mr. Thomson : Q. You live now at Eastport 2–A. Yes. Q. I understood you to say you came from Grand Manan 3–A. I was born there and lived there until I was 22. Q. I understood that you owned American vessels 2—A. No. Q. That you yourself owned American vessels or shares in them after you went to Eastport º–A. I owned shares in American vessels, freight- ing vessels, and I also owned a share in the brig I went to the coast of Labrador in. Q. Was that an American or English vessel?—American registry. I also owned a share in an English vessel that I went to Newfoundland herring fishing in. Q. Well, in order to hold an American registry you must have been an American citizen 3–A. Yes, sir. - Q. After leaving Grand Manan you were naturalized ?–A. Yes. Q. How long ago were you naturalized ?–A.. I was naturalized, I think, about 1851 or 1852; I am not certain. I had to live in the United States five years before I got naturalized. Q. At present you are an American citizen and have been since 1851 or 1852?—A. Yes. - Q. Your sympathies are naturally with the American side of this Question 3–A. My sympathies are for the right, and have been ever Since I was a boy in this fishery. Whatever is right. Q. Well, that is a very wide term. It depends on our stand-point. 2516 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Your sympathies are with the American view of this question ?—A. Not unless they are right. - Q. Well, then, I will put it in another way. You think the American view is right 3–A. I don’t know about that. I have my own views, and I think they are right. . Q. Do your views differ from the American views; do you differ from your neighbors in Eastport 2–A. I differ from some of them, and agree with a good many Dominion people I have talked with. I have also differed from Some of them. Q. Do you consider that the Americans ought not to pay anything under this Commission ?—A. No ; I don’t think they should. I think the markets they get are a full equivalent. Q. Well, that is all I want to know. Your sympathies, then, are with the American views?—A. I don’t take it on the line of sympathy. E take it on the line of right, of justice between man and man. Q. At all events, your view is that the Americans should not pay a dollar 7–A. Not if they keep the markets open. . Q. Well, as the matter now stands?—A. I think that is a full equiva- lent. g Q. That is your idea?—A. For the inshore fisheries. I think the open- ing of the American markets is an equivalent for the Dominion fisheries inside of three miles. - Q. Well, when you say that, from what stand-point are you speaking, the fisherman’s or the merchant's 2 Or do you take a broad, patriotic view of the matter?—A. I am speaking from my own judgment in the business I have followed through life and am still following. Q. Well, when you say that the free market is an entire equivalent for our fisheries, who do you say the free market is given by ; at whose expense ? Is it at the expense of the American fishermen or the body of the United States people?—A. The free market and taking off the duty is in favor of the fishermen. Q. The American fishermen 7–A. No, the Dominion fishermen. Q. And against whom is it?—A. If the duty was put on it would be against the Dominion fishermen. Q. Well, against whom is the taking off of the duty?—A. It is against the United States, of course. - Q. But what class in the United States ?—A.. I don’t know how you intend to class them. I suppose the United States is a country, and if the country takes it off, I suppose the country must make up the amount. - Q. How did you class the British fishermen 2 You thought it was an advantage to them to have the duty off?—A. Simply because it gives him a better market for the fish he produces. Q Tell me why you cannot class the Americans. Tell me what effect it has on the American fishermen, taking off the duty. Have you not thought of it at all?—A. I don’t know that I ever heard a fisherman speaking in regard to it. Q. And you are serious, then, you never heard an American fisher- man complain of this duty being taken off?—A. I don’t know that I have. - Q. Have you ever thought of this, as a practical man, whether it affects the American fisherman at all or not?—A. I have given it a good deal of thought. - Q. Whom does it affect, the merchant or the fisherman 7–A. I say this, that to put on a duty of five cents a box on smoked herring by the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2517 American Government would amount almost to a prohibition of the Smoked-herring business. Q. Well, how as to $2 a barrel on mackerel ?—A. Mackerel is a fish I don’t know much about. I never fished it. I have packed a good many while I was fish inspector at Eastport, twenty-five years. Q. Are there any being smoked on the American shores as at Campo- bello?—A. Yes. © Q. Would they increase in price in consequence of a duty 2–A. I can- not answer that question. Q. Are you serious about that ?—A. I am. If you put on a duty and call me after it has been in operation a few years, I will answer that question. I can’t anticipate anything that might happen. Q. You are serious in saying that five cents a box on herring would be a prohibition to British fisheries, but you can’t say whether, if they were prohibited, it would have the effect of raising the price of Ameri- can fish 3–A. No, I could not say. Q. Then, according to you, the influx of British fish has no effect upon the price of American fish at all?—A. I didn’t say so. Q. Well, do you say so 2 I think it follows from what you have said 3–A. I don’t say anything about it. Q. Do you decline to give any opinion in regard to it 3—A.. I won’t at the present time. -- Q. Have you any doubt that the fish sent in from the British prov- inces has a sensible effect in making the price of fish smaller in the United States market 2—A. They may have that tendency to keep the price down. - Q. Tell me if you believe they have that tendency or not ?—A. I think they may have that tendency. Q. Do you say that they have that tendency º–A. The more fish put on the market, of course the tendency is that way, but there is a point beyond which that tendency is inoperative. The moment you reach the point of the consumer, when he can’t afford to pay, he has to buy some other article of food. Since my time the quantity of smoked herring sold in the United States markets has increased tremendously. The prices they are selling for now are 20 cents in New York, 21 cents in Boston, and 15 cents in Eastport. With the boxes of the present size that will pay the fishermen, but at the sizes they made boxes fifteen or twenty years ago, no fisherman could follow it. When you come to increase the price of herring over 25 cents per box the consumers won’t buy them. Q. There is a certain amount of fish of that description carried into the United States and certain prices are paid. I presume you got the same price for American fish as you got for English cured fish. Is it not so 2 I mean smoked fish in boxes.—A. Yes. Q. I want you to tell me, if you will, whether the importation of that kind of fish from the provinces has any effect on the price of American fish 7–A. I presume it may have some effect; but, as I told you before, I cannot answer that question, begause last year smoked herring was 9 cents a box. & - Q. Do you say it makes a difference or not—the importation of that fish from the provinces—on the price of American fish 7–A. Last year we had the same supplies, and smoked herring were 9 cents a box; and this year, with still the same supplies, they are 15 cents a box at East- port. I cannot tell what occasions the difference in price. I suppose the consumption rules it more than anything else. Q. Does the importation of American fish affect the price, injuriously 2518 AWARD OF TEIE FISHERY COMMISSION. or otherwise, of American cured fish of the same description ?—A. I could not tell you. Q. You have no opinion on the subject at all ?—A. No. Q. I now ask you if the fish that come in from the British provinces have not the effect of making the fish cheaper to the consumer, what- ever effect it may have on the fishermen 3–A.. I don’t know but what it Inay. Q. Have you any doubt about it 3–A.. I cannot form any correct esti- mate, because the price is not two years alike. But there is one thing I can assure you, that the price of fish can never rise above a certain level, because it then gets beyond the reach of the consumer, and when it goes beyond the consumer’s means he will not buy it. Consequently that will regulate itself. i Q. Does not the larger supply of fish that comes in from the provinces under the treaty, than what did before the treaty, have the effect of diminishing the price of fish, and therefore diminishing the price to the consumer ?—A. I cannot answer the question; I don’t know. Q. Though you have dealt in fish forty years 7–A. Yes; fully forty years. Q. How often have you gone of late years to Grand Manan to look how the fisheries are carried on ?—A. I have not been at Grand Manan much for the last six years. Q. You have not been there for the last six years ?—A.. I have been there, but not much. - Q. How many visits in the last six years 3–A. Three or four visits. I Q. And how long would the visit be on each occasion ?—A. Not very Ong. |b. Q. About how long 2—A. Sometimes one day, sometimes only a few OUITS, - Q. Then each visit would not average half a day ?–A. Perhaps not. Q. And how many visits have you made in six years 2—A. I have made perhaps four, maybe five. - Q. What season of the year would you visit Grand Manan 7–A. In Summer time. Q. The Summer time is not the brisk fishing-season there ?—A. Yes. Q. I thought it was spring and fall ?—A. It depends on what kind of fish you have reference to. Q. Take herring.—A. The frozen herring are only taken in the winter. The Smoked-herring trade is in the summer at the center of the island, Wood's Cove, and round there, and late in the fall at White Head, Three Islands, Two Islands, and other parts of the island. They don’t com- mence their smoked-herring fishing there till later in the season. Q. For six years you have only been there five times, on an average half a day at a time, and of course you have had no opportunity of knowing from personal observation what American vessels fished round the island nor what American boats fished round the island. That is obvious, is it not ?—A. I think I have. nº Although you have not been there?—A. Although I have not been €TO. Q. I said from personal observation.—A. I have not seen an Ameri- can boat fishing at Grand Manan; not in the act of fishing. Q. From personal observation you could not possibly say?—A. I have not Seen any fishing there. I deal with all those men. Q. Then the information you have been pleased to give the Commis- Sion in regard to the business done at Grand Manan has not been from AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2519 personal knowledge, but from information received from other persons? —A. I do not say so. Q. Do you not state that now %–A. I lived in Grand Manan until I was 22 years of age. Q. I confine you to the last six years. During the whole of that time you did not visit the island scarcely once a year, five times during six . years. From personal observation you have admitted you cannot speak of the island during those years.-A. I told you I had not seen any fish Caught there. Q. All the information you have been pleased to give the Commission in regard to the fishing round Grand Manan, and the quantity taken by American and British subjects, has been based on hearsay?—A. It has been based on my own actual knowledge, and from conversation With Grand Manan people and others, and men engaged in the business. Q. Is not that hearsay?—A. You may call it what you have a mind to ; I don’t purpose to call it hearsay. Q. I understand you to swear that information you got from other persons, depending on others entirely for the truth of those statements, you decline to call hearsay?—A. I say you can call it hearsay. I come here and swear to the best of my judgment in regard to this matter, from my personal knowledge of Grand Manan, having been a long time resident there, having fished there, and having been through the whole thing; from conversation with men there engaged in the business, and having had business transactions with them, and from receiving ac- Counts and getting my pay from weirs I own there, which is pretty good authority, in my opinion. Q, I wish to get from you exactly what the authority is ; that is hear- Say, is it not ? Do you say you own weirs there?—A. I own shares in Weirs there. Q. Who are the other owners with you, Grand Manan people or East- port people?—A. With the exception of my sister, they are Grand Ma- nan people. My sister owns a share with me; she lives in Eastport. Q. She has not been naturalized ?–A. No ; I did not know it was re- Quired of women. wº- Q. Do you include the herring you take in your weirs in the Ameri- . can catch 7–A. No ; I pay the government a tax for the weirs, and I Suppose they must claim the fishing. º Q. Do you include that portion of the fish out of the weirs which comes to your share as being part of the American catch 3–A. I include it as being part of the Dominion catch, it being caught at Grand Manan. Q. Though it is taken by an American citizen simply doing business in Our Waters, and you call that British catch 3–A. I do; it was caught in British waters, and I pay $10 a year to the Dominion Government on each weir. . Q. Therefore it is British catch 2–A. I presume so; it is caught in British waters and cured on British soil. Q. Then if Americans come in and catch fish very nearly the same place in their vessels, which would be taken out of British waters, you Would call that British catch 3—A. British vessels cannot smoke her- ring on board their vessels. Q. Do I understand that if American vessels come in and catch her- ring or any other fish within three miles of the shore, in British waters, that you call it British catch 3–A. No ; if an American vessel catches fish in British waters within three miles of the shore, I call it American catch, but caught in British waters. Q. You have been pleased to put the value of all the catch round 3520 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Grand Manan at $400,000 a year?—A. Yes; I said that I call it, in my judgment, not over $400,000; not to exceed $500,000. Q. Do you mean British or American catch or both }–A. I mean all that is caught within three miles by both parties or all men. A great many Nova Scotia people come down and camp. I mean that is the catch of the island. $3 Q. This you give as your opinion from having been on the island one season a year for six years, and that for half a day ?—A. I gave that opinion as being to the best of my knowledge, and I obtained it from reliable sources. - Q. Do you know Mr. W. B. McLaughlin 7–A. I have known him for a long time. Q. Is he a respectable man 3–A. Yes. ,” - Q. Is he a credible man?—A. I should think so. I don’t know any. thing to the contrary. $ Q. He is not a man who would make a misstatement under oath will- fully 7–A. I would not suppose he would. - Q. Are you aware that it was his business to find out what the actual catch of the British subjects was, and to make a return to the govern- ment 3–A. I was aware he was fishery warden. I pay my weir-tax to him. - Q. You are not aware that it was his business to find what the actual catch of the island was, and to make a return to the govern- ment º–A. I don’t know. - Q. Mr. McLaughlin has stated that such was his business, and from the returns made by the people themselves, which, he stated, were en- tirely under the mark, he found that their catch amounted to half a mill- ion dollars. Are you prepared to contradict that statement º–A. I am prepared to let my statement stand as based on my judgment. Q. Either state that Mr. McLaughlin's statement is untrue or that it is not.—A. I will not make any such statement. I will say that Mr. McLaughlin, I think, has erred in judgment. Q. At page 254 of Mr. McLaughlin's testimony there is the following: Q. Will you tell me what is the value of the fish taken by our own people each year on the island 2–A. Well, I could tell from my fishing returns of last year. I could have brought them all. Q: Do you make up your return for the whole year 2—A. Yes; from the 1st January to the 31st December. Q. You do not make it up for the fiscal year 3–A. No ; I am ordered to make it up to the 31st December. The return states itself that it is so made up. The amount in my estimate, as I made it up from inquiry last year, is $383,891, but that is far under the real catch. - Q. You say that it is far under the actual value of the catch. How do you account for its being under the amount 7–A. Well, the fishermen are reluctant to give an ac- count of what they make on account of the taxation. We have a free-school law now, and are taxed very heavily for it. e Q. It happens that you are an assessor of taxes”—A. I am at times, and I am a County Councilor, and have been a census enumerator. - Q. And they do not like to give this information to you ? You are the last person to whom they want to give it?—A. Well, I tell them that the Marine Department never lets such information go out of its possession. They tell me there is no need of its doing so; that I have it all in my hands. They say it is too thin. Q. Then you believe the amount you have given is an underestimate %–A. I know it must be over half a million dollars; that is our old $500,000. He is a gentleman who swears that from the lips of the men them- Selves he got a statement that the catch each year amounted to $383,891, in round numbers $400,000, as being the British catch alone. He says that is underestimated, and it is at least $100,000 more.—A. I cannot help it ; I have given you my opinion. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2521. Q. With your means of obtaining information, do you still presume to put your opinion against his?—A. I do ; I don’t depart from it one particle. - . Q. Although it was Mr. McLaughlin’s business to obtain a return of the catch 3–A. I have given a great deal of thought and care to it for years. - - t - Q. Then I understand you to say that the catch amounts to $400,000 in round numbers, including the American catch and every catch all round the island 3–A. Yes. Q. Then Mr. McLaughlin, has told an untruth deliberately, or those people lied to him when they said they caught $383,891 in value, and in round numbers $400,000; do you think the people have deliberately de. ceived Mr. McLaughlin 7–A. I don’t say so; Mr. McLaughlin may have deceived himself; I don’t say whether he has been deceived or the peo- ple have been deceived. Q. He got those figures from statements of the people themselves.— à I gave mine from my own judgment, and I know of no reason to alter them. - . Q. Is it probable, in your judgment, that the people of the island de- ceived Mr. McLaughlin as to their catch 2—A. I don’t know. Q. Is it probable %—A. I don’t know what the people and Mr. Mc- Laughlin may do together. - - Q. Do you think it is probable %—A. Mr. McLaughlin, until a few years ago, had lived on Gannet Rock, which is a long way from the mainland, and was not connected with the fisheries. - Q. Mr. McLaughlin has stated that he went from house to house and asked each man as to his catch 3–A. That may be. Q. You know Grand Manan; do you believe the people would delib- erately deceive Mr. McLaughlin, and make believe that they caught more fish than they actually did 3–A. I don’t know ; I cannot answer that question; I don’t know what the people of Grand Manan told Mr. McLaughlin. & Q. You cannot form any opinion as to whether the people would de- ceive him or not ?—A. I don’t wish to form any opinion, because I do not think it is necessary. I don’t wish to form one without due consid- eration, and unless I know with whom he talked. I don’t propose to have anything to do with Mr. McLaughlin's talk with the inhabitants. Q. Do you admit that, if Mr. McLaughlin tells the truth, when he Say S that he went from house to house and made inquiries of each fish- erman, he has better means of information than you ?—A. I won’t admit that. I know Mr. McLaughlin well, and I won’t admit it. - Q. Do you intend the Commission to understand that Mr. McLaugh- lin is a man not to be relied on ?—A. I don’t wish to state anything of that kind. I have made my statement, Mr. McLaughlin has made his, and the Commission may choose between the two. Q. You have sworn that you believe him to be a credible man”—A. Yes; as we speak of men, I have nothing to say against Mr. McLaugh- lin. He has lived in Grand Manan; I know him; and he has lived on Gannet Rock for a long time. Q. Would his living on Gannet Rock alter his moral character 7—A. Not a particle, but it deprives him of seeing the extent of the fishing at Grand Manan. . Q. That may be. Does it deprive him of the opportunity of going round and asking the different people what they caught 7–A. No; he can go round. - Q. Do you believe the inhabitants would misinform him by telling 2522 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. him that they caught more than they did, for the purpose of increasing their taxes?—A. I could not answer the question; the inhabitants can answer it; I refuse to answer it. 207 78 Bait ---------------------------- $14 06 || 4 dozen milk.----------------- . 14 ()0 Error, 21 cents; widow and or- Hoisting ballast -------------- 75 phans, 31 cents ---------------- 52 Towing, November 3, 1875 ---- 5 00 Milk ---------------------------- 93 | Rigging fly-jib, …------------ 8 10 Towing ------------------------- 39 Taking off sails, &c. - - - - - - - - - - 3 00 Fly-jib -------------------------- 56 | Seraping and tarring ---------- 8 00 Sails ---------------------------- 21 | Elwell medicine-chest. -----...- 6 20 Scraping and tarring------, ------ 57 | Hoisting mackerel ... ---. ------ 4 50 Medicine-chest ------------------ 44 || 16 barrels water ---------...----- 3 20 Hoisting ------------------------ 32 || 2 feet T. and T. wood - - - - - - - , •º 1 00 Water, 23 cents; wood, 7 cents... 30 | Extra to cook ---------------- 10 00 Cook---------------------------- 8 48 Cook's average, 16 shares -- - - - 110 74 26 83 144 (382 27 26 83 Cook has average share and half his fish and $10–14+ shares. & Mess No. 1. Mess No. 2. Mess No. 1 Mess No. 2 # | gº º * * * T E # É # £ #: Crew's names. ; § s s #3 2 || 4 || 3 || 2 || 4 | # | 4 || 2 | # | 2 || 4 || 3 | #: p={ cº cº * cº * cº bD § 3 || 3 || 3 | = | | | | | E | | | E | = | # ## 3 || 3 || 3 || 3 || 5 || 3 || 3 || 5 || 3 || 3 || 5 || 3 || 3: - ſº | P- O ſº | Q- C ſº | Pi— O | Pº ºn- O Cb Wm. Crawley and John Hick..l....l.--...----. s º gº w s sº mº gº i s sº ºs e º ºs 30| 43 $241 72 7| 25%42 75 #284 47 Thomas Crawley, one-half ... --. * gº º º º gº is sº º ºs tº º sº I & * * * , as as sº s : * * * * * * 9| 148 77 92] 2 66 13 98| 91 90 John Murphy, three-quarters. . . ---|--|--|------|- * * * | * * * * | * * * * * 6, 168|| 54 72] 2 126, 15 78 70 50 John Collin. ------------------ * * * | * > * * * * * : * ~ * : º gº tº & sº * I e º ºs e : º E = ± º gº 11| 66 90 64 2 26 12 is 103 42 Maurice Hickey, one-quarter ..]. ---|---. ------|--|--|- e sº g : * * * * * * 7| 61; 58 44; 1 95 8 85 67 29 Mike Coughlan, one-half - ...... * * * : * * * is m º gº tº º sº I º º sº tº º ºs I ºf ºº & G = * 5| 159| 46 36|| 1 || 99| 8 97: 55 33 Allan Cameron ---------------. | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * | * º ºs s º º ſº gº tº ºt 15| 82 123 28] 3 137 22 11 145 39 Timothy Kelley - - - - - - - - - ----- * * * | * * *g tº , sº sº tº sº E tº tº sº sº e i s m = sº I gº ºs g º ºs ºg 5| 95 43 80 1 168| 11 04' 54 84 Thomas Green --------------- sº tº ſº I & gº ºn s : s sº tº º tº . ---|--|--|------ 12| 118 100 72. 3 19 18 57 119 29 Jos. Goslin, jr. -----------------|. e ‘º gº * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ºn tº t w = * * * * = as gº ºs e 11| 39| 89 56; 2. 142] 16 26 105 S2 L. J. Dias, eook --------------- * = a i e s = < 1 - s = * * = *e sº a as º ºs º i º e º ºn tº gº 10| 192 87 68] 1 97 8 91 96 59 £harles Cantrell.---------.....!-- * * * * * * * * * sº sº gº º gº tº s & sº a l is ºn s = lig º' º e º ºs 12| 29 97 16] 1 118, 9 54; 106 70 Nicholas J. O'Brien.-----------l.-- ge sº º as sº I e º ºs º ºs º * tº gº tº s º ºs º gº sº ºn tº º ºs 14|| 50|| 114 00] 2 97| 14 91 128 91 James Dooley ----------------. 9| 180;99 00. -- . 160; $4 80| 3 50 26 00| 1| 105 9 15, 138 95 Michael Murray. -------------. 9| 183| 99 15| 5 40|| 31 20 . . . . . 2 8 ...| 90 2 70. 133 13 John Barrett -----------------. 5 32 51 60 1 100 900]....]. ---|---...--. 1| 90) 8 70) 69 30 Total.------------------ | 24 Iº 75 7| 100 45 00| 156] 1021, 252 08 s 100,225 001,771 83 Schooner Oliver Eldridge. Sailed for the Bay of St. Lawrence August 5, 1875, (Absent 2 months and 28 days.) Arrived at Gloucester November 2, 1875, - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2603 l, Packg. off. 24 barrels, 195 pounds mess No. 1 mackerel, at 20 - - - - - - - - - --. $499 50 7 barrels, 100 pounds mess No. 2 mackerel, at 12.... ... ----- 90 -00 156 barrels, 102 pounds mess No. 1 mackerel, at 16. --- - - - - - - - - 2, 504 16 37 barrels, 100 pounds mess No. 2 mackerel, at 12...". -- - - - - - - 450 00 226 97 x, 3, 543 66 (grs. Stock.) Less stock charges.--------------------- 415 56 (net stock.) 2)3, 128 10 1,564 05 Mess-mackerel are mackerel with heads and tails cut off and scraped, losing in weight 26 pounds on the barrel by the operation, but increasing the value of the mack- erel. ' Ledger Net page. { Crew's names. shares." 438. William Crawley--------------------------------------------------- $115 40 291. John Hickey------------------------------------------------------- 115 40 438. Thomas Crawley, 3 - ----------------------------------------------- 78 48 450. John Murphy ------------------------------------------------------ 50 38 453. John Collin -------------------- • * * * * * * * * * * * s is sº tº gº tº $ tº tº ſº tº º ſº tº dº tº º º & eºs º ºs º tº 76 59 291. Maurice Hickey, + -------------------------------------------------- 60 58 452. Michael Coughlan, # ------------------------------------------------ 41 91 452. Allan Cameron ----------------------------------------------------- 118 56 451. Timothy Kelley, + --------------- ---------------------------------- * 48 13 49. Thomas Green.-------------------------------------- - - - - - - - * = • * * * * * 92 46 78. Joseph Goslin, jr. --------------------------------------------------- 78 99 451. Lauriana J. Dias, cook---------------------------------------------- 190 50 452. Charles Cantrell.--------------------------------------------------- 79 87 452. Nicholas J. O’Brien------------------------------------------------- 102 08 431. James Dooley ------------------------------------------------------ 112 12 330. Michael Murray ---------------------- * * * * * * se º ºs ºs º ºs º ºs º ºs s as ºn tº s as me as sº sº sº tº me as 106 30 317. John Barrett --------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * * * * 42 47 Milk, $14; ballast, 75 cents.-------------------------------------- - - - 14 75 Towing, $5; fly-jib, $8.10 ------------------------ * * * * * * * is sº ºr º- as ſº º us tº sº º º 13 10 Sails, $3; scrp. and tarr., $8 ----------------------------------------- 11 00 Medicine-chest, $6.20; hoisting, $4.50 ---------------------------. ---- 10 70 Water, $3.20; wood, $1.---------------------------------------------- 4 20 Balance------------------------------------------------------------ 8 1, 564 05 The difference between skipper's account and wharf account is explained as follows: The skipper or master keeps account as the different catches of his crew are weighed off. If the account of the paeked barrels, after they are rolled out on the wharf, dis- agree with the skipper's, the value has to be charged or credited in gross stock, as it falls short or overruns. This “bay trip’’ was copied from Trip Book of George Steele, of Gloucester, Mass. George F. Winter, bookkeeper, to show the method of settling the voyage of a mack- erel catcher. Abbreviations and other terms used are explained in brackets, thus (). Attest : - DAVID W. LOW. The mess-mackerel are mackerel with the heads and tails cut off, and the mackerel scraped; losing in weight 26 pounds on the barrel, but increasing the value of the mackerel. wº Q. There is an item for difference between skipper's account and wharf account. How much was it on that voyage %–A. $6. Q. What does that mean 2–A. It means this: In weighing out the mackerel the skipper keeps an account of the weight of each man’s lot, and when the mackerel are rolled out on the wharf, if there is a discrep- ancy between the actual weight of it as rolled out and the footings of the skipper's account, of course they don’t know on which one of the crew it comes; so it is put in the gross stock account and divided among 2604 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. all. If the balance is in the vessel's favor it is credited, and if against the vessel it is charged in the stock account. Q. What is the history of the cook's wages, coming out of the men 3– A. In former times the crew had to take turns in cooking, and then, of course, they had so many green cooks, and the fares were so poor that they made up their minds to have a cook. Mr. DAVIES. Is there any special object in putting these in Ž Mr. DANA. It is only to give a specimen of the manner of making up the accounts for each kind of a voyage. Mr. FOSTER. It shows also the result of each kind of voyage. By Sir Alexander Galt: - Q. I suppose the same remark applies to the calculation of the ves- sel's share in this case as in the other that you have given 3–A. Yes; just the same. I have here a statement'showing the method of making up the voyage of a Schooner to the Grand Banks. By Mr. Dana : . a Q. Is this codfish 7–A. Yes; cod and halibut. We don’t get many halibut on the George's in proportion to the halibut caught by those that go specially for it, and go into the deep water, where they are more likely to be found—about 200 or 300 fathoms. The statement is as fol- lows: Schooner Howard Steele. 10 tons ice at $3, from Webster ------------------...------- $30 00 l 40 pounds bait at $1, bought by skipper, with cash carried - -- 40 00 Widow and Orphans’ Fund - - - - - - s sº sº sº ºn tº ºn tº gº tº º 'º e º 'º tº º ºs º ºs º ºs º ºs º º 1 61 2)71 61 stock charges. Crews' expenses. # Stock charges----------- 35 81 Ice ------------------ $1 36 1 dozen condensed milk. -- 3 50 Bait ----------------- 1 82 Scraping and tarring. ----- 5 00 Widow and orphans'-- 07 12 barrels water - - - - - - - - - - 2 40 Milk----------------- 32 1-foot wood (sawing and Scraping and tarring. - 46 splitting, &c.).--------- 50 Water --------------- 22 Cook's Wages. ------------ 29 34 Wood --------------- 4 *=e amº Cook ------ * * * * * * * * * * * 2 67 - 11)76 55 crew's expenses. 6 96 Share of expenses -------- 6 96 Fish. White halibut. Gray halibut. 3 | g . . .; 3 || 3 | g . . .; 3 || 3 | # } # #3 | ##| # | #3 | ##| 3 | # Crew’s names. P- §§ = } P- #h; E £ | }. §: H S4– q) rº- &H 803 º * rº ows "E.c. rº c cº "E.- re: p cº 8 º #3 | #3 º #5 | E3 % p # 5': 53 || 3 || 5's 53 3 g 24 Č ºf ' | Flº 3 || C ſº | p 5: | dº Ö Ed. Flagg --------------------------. 311 || $25 61 | 66 57 || $1 71 |.-----|--|--|--|------ $27 32 James Madden ---------------------- 397 32 69 30 26 78 5 4 $0 06 33 53 Thos. Kelly.------------------------- 375 || 30 87 64 55 1 65 I.-----|------|------ "| 32 52 Ed. O'Neil --------------------------- 343 28 24 82 71 2 13 8 7 11 30 48 Dan. Donahue ----------------------- 305 25 11. 18 15 45 30 26 39 25 95 John Egan -------------------------- 325 | 26 76 28 24 72 19 17 25 27 73 Nich. Johnson ----------------------- 315 25 94 39 33 99 |- - - - - - 10 |------ 26 93 Axel Obson.------------------------. 320 26 35 21 18 54 12 133 15 27 04 John Lewis.------------------------. 416 || 34 25 30 26 78 | 155 |...-- - - 1 99 37 02 D. Kennison. -- -------------------- 365 || 30 05 47 40 1 20 ! ...----- 11 ------ 31 25 John Brien, Cook -------------------. 259 || 21 33 60 52 1 56 13 ||------ 17 23 06 Total.------------------------- 3,731 307 20 485 || 417 12 51 || 242 208 3 12 322 83 AWARD OF THE FISEIFRY COMMISSION. 2605 Average price of fish 1646-100 cents each. Cook has average share, and half his fish pays one share of all expenses. Sailed for George's Bank August 7, 1875. Arrived at Gloucester August 20, 1875 (absent 13 days). 18,805 lbs. large cod, at 2 5-8 -------------------. 493. 63 6,500 lbs. Small cod, at 1.5-16. ----...------------. 85. 31 260 lbs. pollack, at 5-8 -- ... --. • - - - - - tº gº tº sº ºf tº gº tº tº sº gº tº 1. 62 194 gal, livers, at 15 --------- ------------------ 29, 10 Cash for sword-fish ----------------------------- 4. 75 614. 41 485 (less heads)=417 lbs. white halibut, at 6..... 25. 02 242 “ =208 lbs. gray halibut, at 3.----. 6. 24 - 145. 68 Gross stock. Less stock charges------------------------------ 71.61 2)574. 06 Net stock. 287. 03 Amt. Vessel or crew's share, Ledger page. Crew's names. Net shares, 386 Edwin Flagg ------------------------------------------------ 20, 36 or 415 James Madden ---------------------------------------------- 26. 57 pd. 406 Thomas Kelly -------------------------------, -------------- 25.56 pd. 456 Edward O’Neil - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *s ºr º e º gº º sº se sº e º ºs s as 22. 52 pd. 415 Daniel Donahue -------------------------------------------- 18.99 pd. 415 John Egan ------------------------------------------------- 20, 77 pd. 392 Nicholas Johnson ------------------------------------------- 19.97 pd. 392 Axel Olson ------------------------------------------------- 20.08 pd. 435 John Lewis . . --- ------------------------------------------- 30.06 pd. 441 David Kennison -------------------------------------------- 24.29 p6. Wo acct. John Brien, cook -------------------------------------------. 45. 44 pa. Milk ------------------------------------------------------- 3. 50.pd. Scraping and tarring---------------------------------------- 5. 00 Water ------------------------------------------------------ 2, 40 Wood ------------------------------------------------------ 50 Balance --------------------------------------------------- 2 287. 03 This trip or voyage was copied from “trip book” of George Stele, of Gloucester, Mass., George F. Winter, bookkeeper, to show the method of settling the voyage of a George's Bank fishing-vessel. Abbreviations and other terms used are explained in parentheses thus ( ). Attest. DAVID W. LOW. In the Georges fishing each man's halibut, when he catches them, are marked either on the head or the tail with his private mark. The codfish are thrown together, but each one cuts out the tongue and throws it into a bucket. Then the skipper counts them up at the end of the day and sets down a memorandum of how many fish each man has Caught. The halibut are landed and weighed, and each man is credited With the number of fish he has caught in detail. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. That identifies the halibut, but how are the cod identified? They may vary from two to twenty pounds?—A. They make an average. By Mr. Foster : *f; Q. What was the number of the crew in that trip 7–A. Nine hands, I think. - By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. I want to ask you one question. I see this vessel took 40 barrels of bait, and was out only thirteen days. Could she possibly use that ? 2606 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. What kind of bait is it?—A. Herring, or probably alewives. They take imoney to buy bait, and go to Cape Cod or down east—generally to Cape Cod. e - Q. They would not have it on board when they sailed 2–A. No ; they take money and buy it from a baiter outside if they come across a baiter on the way, or if they don’t they go down to Cape Cod. By Mr. Foster: - Q. That quantity, if not used, would not be wasted ?–A. No. They use hand-lines on the Georges, and are more liberal in the use of bait than the trawlers. Q. You would not say, I suppose, that they would use up that bait in that time 2—A. I should say not. But they always look out to get bait enough, if they have a chance. By Mr. Dana : Q. Have you made out a table to show the cost of a new schooner in the year 1875, fitted for each kind of business, or for the two kinds of business—cod and mackerel ? If you have, take one of them.—A. I have. The first I take is as follows: Cost of a new schooner, in 1875, at Gloucester, Mass., fitted for the mackerel fishery ready for Sea, with 17 hands, vessel 67 tons, for a three months' voyage. Cost of hull, including spars, patent windlass, and patent steerer ------------ $5,500 Rigging, including sails, rigging, blocks, stove, tinware, 45 fathoms chain, 100 fathoms 83-inch manila cable, and 2 anchors (1,060 lbs.). ----. ---...----. 2, 200 OUTFITS. Bait, 55 bbls. of porgies and 7 bbls. of clams. -------------------------------- 400 Salt, 50 hlids, of salt ------------------------------------------------------- 100 Sundries—bait-mill, seines, hooks, adzes, and other articles used on deck. ---- 50 Provisions, including fuel and oil for light for 3 months - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 700 Sundries—lanterns, horns, compasses, charts, bunting, spy-glass, log, Sounding line and lead.----. --------- , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * = s. sº º a tº - as - tº ºr 100 Barrels, 450 fish-barrels, unheaded and numbered. ---...----------. ---------- 725 Total cost of Vessel, with outfits ------------------------------------- 9, 775 FOR SEINING—ADDITIONAL COST. Seine, length 200 fathoms (1,200 feet), depth 30 fathoms, 24-inch mesh, fitted ready for use ------------------------------------------------------------ 900 Boat, seine-boat, fitted ready for use ---------------------------...----------- . 250 Dories, fitted ready for use-----------------------...------------------------- 50 - 1,200 Less 50 bbls. bait, $325, and provisions for 3 less men 3 months, $125. --...--- 450 750 Total cost of Seiner, with outfits.----------...----------. ----...------- 10, 525 By Mr. Davies: Q. Is that an actual case ?—A. It is from the cost of an actual vessel. It was procured from an actual vessel fitted ready for sea. It was pro- cured as a specimen for the Centennial. By Mr. Foster: Q. You did that yourself?—A. Yes; I went and procured the state- ment from the owner, who bought the vessel and gave me the items. By Mr. Dana : Q. You make a difference between the cost of a vessel for seining and one for hand-lining?—A. Yes; the vessel fitted for hand-lining costs AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2607 $9,775, for seining $10,525. She has to be provided with a seine and Seine-boats and dories, which come to $1,200, but she does not carry so many men or use so much bait, which makes a difference in her favor of $325 against the $1,200 added, leaving a balance of $750 to be added to the cost of a vessel fitted for hand-lining in order to fit her for seining. Q. Now, can you give us a similar statement of the cost of a vessel for trawling halibut on the Banks, made out in the same manner for the Centennial 3–A. Yes; I have it. It is as follows: Cost of a new schooner at Gloucester, Mass., in 1875, fitted for trawling halibut on the Banks- , Vessel of 71 tons, cost $8,000. Vessel made 9 trips to Western and Grand Banks, be ing at sea 302 days, with 12 men for crew, at the following expense, viz: Trawl gear--------------------------------------------------------- as ºr is as * $1,023 25 Vessel's expense account------------------------------------------------- 1,822 25 Provisions, &c.--...---------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1,426 03 General charges, ice, bait, salt, &c ,-------------------------------------- 1, 135 50 $5,408 64 Q. Is that carpenters' measurement 4–A. No ; that is new measure- ment. $ Q. The carpenters build by their own old measurement, don’t they 3– A. Yes; they build by their own old measurement. Q. But this is the registered tonnage %—A. Yes. By Sir Alexander Galt': º Q. I understand that this vessel cost $8,800, while the other cost $5,500 ?—A. This is 71 tons. - Q. Well, there is only a difference of four tons between this and the last you gave 3–A.. I know that, but the $8,800 includes cost of rigging, While the other is only the cost of hull. - - Py Mr. Dana : Q. I suppose there is a difference in the style of building 7—A. We can get vessels built cheaper down East than at Essex, and some at ES- sex cheaper than others. It is according to how they are built. The following statement shows the cost of a schooner fitted for cod and hal- ibut fishing on the Grand Banks: Cost of a new schooſter, in 1875, at Gloucester, Mass., fitted for fishing on Grand Banks for codfish and halibut, the fish to be salted on board, fitted for four months' voyage, with 14 hands. - Cost of hull, 77.24 tons----------------------------------------------------- $6,000 *igging ------------------------------------------------------------------ 2, 550 6 dories, fitted ready for use ----------------------------------------------- 168 Trawls, 13,500 fathoms, fitted ---------------------------------------------- 607 Knives -------------------------------- ----------------------------- sº in s = m sº 15 Salt, 200 hlids.------------------------------------------------------------ 400 Ice, 12 tons, for preserving bait.------------------------------------------- 36 Water, 60 bbls------------------------------------------------------------- 12 Bait, 12,000 pogies, or herring.----------...--------------------------------- 100 *nek---------------------------------------------------------------------- 34 Nippers, 23 dozen pairs woollen-------------------------------------------- - 12 Provisions ----------------. ---------------------------------------------- 800 Total cost of vessel, with outfits. ---------------------- & ſº tº ºf º º º -------- 10,734 2608 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. I have now a statement of a vessel fitted for the George's Banks, for cod-fishing, ready for sea. It is as follows: AT GLOUCESTER, MASS. Wes&cl fitted for George's Bank cod-fishing, ready for sea, summer trip. Tonnage 80 tons, w with 11 hands, 5 weeks. Cost of hull---------------------------------------------------------------- $5,200 Spars---------------------------------------------------------------------- 400 Rigging-------------------------------------------------------------------- 550 Sails----------------------------------------------------------------------- 575 Dory ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 14 30 tons pebble ballast -------------------------------- ---------------------- 50 Platforms, ice-houses, and other fittings of hold.----. ------------------------ 75 Gurry-pens and other deck-fittings.------------------------------------------ 30 230 fathoms 8+ manila cable, weighing 3,304 pounds ---...---...- '• * = * * * * * * * * * * 450 3 anchors, of 500 pounds each----------------------------------------------- 120 6 dozen 16-pound lines, 3 dozen gauging lines - - - - - - - - - - ---------------------- 10 Lanterns, horns, compasses, charts, buntil g, spy-glass, log, &c. -------------- 100 10 tons ice, for preserving bait and halibut ---------------------------------- 30 40 barrels bait.------------------------------------------------------------- 40 Wood and coal ------------------------------------------------------------- 10 14 barrels water--------------- • e º E & sº º sº nº e º 'º an ºr ºn tº ſº gº gº gº gº g an º ºs m º ºn tº as e º sº as ºr tº º ºs ºs º ºs º ºs s is tº 3 Provisions for 11 men, 5 weeks.---------------------------------------------- 175 Total cost of vessel and outfits.----. -----------------------. • & sº tº º tº tº º ºs tº 7,862 Q. I believe that in the last but one of the accounts you read from the returns the small cod was put in. Is that now usually brought in 3– A. Yes, it is saved and brought in. Q. It used in former times to be thrown over ?—A. Well, I don’t know about that. Q. Now they are brought in and have a market value?—A. Yes. Q. The liver and other parts are brought in and saved ?–A. Yes. Q. Then the gurry-pen is the pen in which they throw the gurry 3– A. Yes. Q. That is kept and thrown overboard at the proper time and place?— A. Yes. Q. Have you any memorandum there to show the amount of the im- portation into the United States from the Dominion fisheries in any one year, so as to show what value the privilege is to the people of the Do- minion ?—A. I have a memorandum of the importation last year. Q. That is obtained from the custom-house 7–A. It is obtained from a book that I saw in the room. Mr. DAVIES. Let us have the book. Mr. DANA. You need not mind that until we get the book. Will you take any other memorandum or table you have made 7–A. I have a profit and loss account of George Steele's vessels in the Gulf of St. Law- rence mackerel fisheries for seventeen years. It is made up from his bay trip book, Gloucester. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Be kind enough to explain how you made it up 7–A. I gave him credit for the number of barrels of mackerel he got, the gross catch of his vessels, and deducted from it the stock charges, making the net stock, and divided that by two, which gave the vessel's share for the whole period of seventeen years. Then I charged the outfits and ex- penses. I charged him for the charter what I supposed. Q. Did you take this from his books?—A. No ; it is an estimated profit and loss accounſ, made up by me. Q. He is the owner of the ship º–A. Yes. AWARL) OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2609 By Mr. Dana: Q. Instead of trying to estimate a charge to be made for the use of the ship you call it “charter”? Sir ALEXANDER GALT. I understand that one side of the account is made up from the books, and the other side is an estimate. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg: Q. Do you find in the book the actual sales?—A. Yes. By Mr. Dana: Q. You can go on with your statement.—A. It is as follows: Number of vessels engaged during 17 years, from 1858 to 1876, inclusive, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence mackerel fishery, excepting the years 1870 and 1871, when none were sent, by George Steele, of Gloucester, 107; average time employed yearly, 4 months 13 days; average number of hands employed yearly for 17 years, 15. Stock charges, 17 years. For bait, &c. ---------------- $48,052 80 Outfits and expenses : Provisions for 15 men for 4 mos. 13 days, in 107 vessels, 15 x 133 x 107 x 40 cts. per day, for fuel, oil, and provisions. 85, 386 00 8,500 bbls. Salt. -------------- 8,500 00 107 bait mills, at $15. -------. 1,605 00 Fishing-gear for 107 vessels, at $45 each.-----...----. ---. 4, 815 00 Custom-house and port charges 2, 140 00 Charter of 107 schooners, 4 mos. 23 days each, at $200 per month -------------------- 94,802 00 Insurance on charter, $94,802; barrels, $30,000; bait, $48,- 052; and outfits, $100,406; total, $278,160, at 4 per cent. 11, 126 00 “Skippership,” or master’s commission, on “net stock,” $355,780, at 4 per cent.----. 14, 231 00 222,605 00 DR. VESSELS’ To insurance on 107 vessels, $535,000, at 4 per cent ... . $21,400 00 interest on $535,000, at 7 per cent., 44 mos------------ 14,056 00 taxes on $460,000, at $18 per year, for 43 months.----. 3,037 00 depreciation on vessels, 4% mos., 107 vessels, at $275 - each--------------------. 29, 425 00 67,918 00 Balance to 107 vessels.. - 26, 884 00 94,802 00 Net earnings of each schooner, $251. Catch, 17 years. 33,645 bbls. mackerel- - - - - - - - - $403,832 86 Less stock charges -----. 48,052 80 Net stock-------------------- 355, 780 00 Charterer for vessel's share. -- 177,890 00 Crews' share.---------------- 177,890 00 355, 780 00 Charterers’ expenses. ... -- - - - - 222,605 00 Charterers’ share, or earnings of vessel------------------- 177,890 00 Loss ------------------- 44,715 00 Charterer's loss on each vessel- 41800 Each vessel’s earnings, as per vessel account below - - - - - - - 251 00 Actual loss yearly on each Vessel -------------. -- 167 00 ACCOUNT. CR. Charter --------------------- $96,802 00 … 96,802)00 Q. The first part of that statement, I understand, assumes that you, are dealing with the charterer?—A. Yes. . . . Q. The latter part shows what would be the result to the owner if he would charter his vessels to some one else?—A, No. “If the owner who OWned the vessel kept his account as well as the charterer. 164 F 26.10 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. |By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. The man who charters the vessel would lose 3—A. The one who chartered the vessel and fitted her for fishing loses $418, and the one who lets him have the vessel makes $251. Q. Besides interest on his vessel ?—A. Yes. Besides interest on the valuation of his vessel. By Mr. Davies: Q. Allowing for depreciation ?—A. Yes. Q. Ten per cent.” I did’t hear you read the allowance for deprecia- tion.—A. “Depreciation on vessels 43 months, 107 vessels, at $275 £ach—$29,425.” 2 * * Q. What rate is that ?—A. I didn’t reckon it any more than what, in my judgment, the depreciation would equal on one of our fishing ves- Sels. - w x By Mr. Dana: Q. From your experience, what do you take to be the depreciation in a new vessel the first five years? Have you any means of knowing that ? Have you inquired into that ?–A. Well, the depreciation the first year on a new vessel is more than any other time. Q. What do you suppose to be the depreciation on an average of a well-built vessel, built at Gloucester or Essex, in the fishing business, when well taken care of? I don’t mean incurring any extraordinary expenses, or suffering from extraordinary negligence, but with good ordinary care taken of her ?—A. The first year she would depreciate $1,200. That is, supposing her to cost $8,000. - . . . . By Sir Alexander Galt : -. Q. Why should she depreciate more the first year than the second?— A. Because everything is new, and if at the end of a year you want to sell a new vessel, she will not bring so much. All these articles have to be renewed at the end of two years at the most—sails, rigging, and everything of that kind. Q. Then it would seem she should depreciate more the second year. By Mr. Dana: \ ‘.… Q. A little of that depreciation must be fancy. It is just like the ordinary case where second-hand goods sell for much less than brand new goods, although, practically, they may in some cases be almost as good as new 3–A. Yes. Q. Do you think a merchant, having to make up a profit and loss account and wishing to know his exact position at the end of a year on that trip, would allow that amount”—A. I think he would strike off One thousand two hundred dollars. Q. That is, in making up an account with himself, in which case he has no motive for Ímisrepresenting the value. It is based on the theory that if he had to sell her under fair average circumstances he would lose that amount 7–A. Yes. - Q. Now, what do you think the depreciation would be at the end of five years 7–A. I think a vessel built for $8,000 at the end of five years would not be worth more than $6,000, kept, of course, in good running order. - - • # * - . . . . . By Sir Alexander Galt: --- Q. That would only be $800 depreciation for the last four years. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2611 By Mr. Dana : } Q. Now, does the rate of depreciation diminish as you go on ?—A. Yes, SII’. - * - Q. Is the depreciation for the second year as great as for the first 3– A. Not so much, but it is more than the third year, because at the end of the third year she has a new suit of Sails. - Q. She gets a new lease of life almost 3–A. Yes. Q. Then after that year I suppose she always has a proper suit of Sails, and the depreciation diminishes on that vessel ?—A. Yes. Q. The period of greatest depreciation is from the time she is brand new to the time when she is not brand new 2–A. Yes. - By Mr. Foster : Q. How many months are these vessels employed per annum on an average %—A. It is stated in that summary exactly. Q. Mr. Steele's vessels would be about the average of the whole fleet 3 —A. Yes. * Q. You have called the average $$75 for the depreciation on a trip of four and a half months –A. Yes. Q. Then that would be $550 depreciation for the year?—A. Yes. Q. That would be an average for the course of her life 3–A. Yes. Q. The cost is assumed to be how much º–A. That average depre- ciation is based on an average cost of $5,000. By Mr. Dana: g * * Q. Have you any other tables except the little one that we threw out?—A. No other tables. I have a description of how a voyage for mackerel-fishing is conducted. Q. We won’t have that at present 7–A. I have a statement of the Quantity of fish furnished to the Army during the war. Q. You were active in getting fish put into the rations of the Army 2 —A. I was. Q. You may state, without going into figures, perhaps, what effect that had upon the fishing interests of Gloucester during the time the war lasted?—A. I think it improved it. It made a better market for the fish and gave them higher prices. & Q. Do you think it had a sensible effect 2—A. It increased the de- mand. - Q. Do your statistics enable you to state to what extent 2–A. I can give you the number of barrels of fish used in the Army. Q. I mean the quantity sent from Gloucester?—A. No, I can’t do that. g Q. What was the quantity used in the Army annually. Give us one year as a specimen?—A. In the year 1864 they used 5,569,000 pounds of pickled fish, which cost $395,547.26, and 6,156,858 pounds of dried fish, which cost $451,025. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Where is that taken from ?—A. It is taken from a letter of the Commissary General of Subsistence of the United States Army in reply to a letter I wrote him. Q. That might be the cost as delivered to the Army?—A. That is what the United States paid for it when they bought it. - By Mr. Dana : Q. They delivered it at their own expense to the troops?—A. I pre- SUl Iſle SO. 2612 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Now I would like to ask you somewhat the same question I did to another witness, but I want to put it beyond doubt. You know they make up the voyages, and the details go into those books. Suppose a fisherman wants to know how much he is charged for his provisions, he has the means of knowing it from the books of the owners º–A. There are no provisions charged to him in our books, unless he is on what is called winter-shore fishing. ..? * Q. That I don’t care so much about. But whatever the items are that are charged to him, he has the means of knowing by the accounts given him, and also by examination of the books, if he wishes it 3–A. Yes. - - Q. And every owner of a vessel in Gloucester has to have a trip-book, doesn’t he, and to have his accounts regularly kept *—A. Yes. Some keep it on a sheet of paper and some in books. But all the trips have to be made up, so as to show to the master and crew. Q. A sharesman is not obliged to take his share in money, is he " He has a right to take it in fish 7–A. Yes, half his fish—that is, after he pays his share of the expenses. Q. Of course he has to pay the incumbrances, but he has a right, instead of receiving their market value, to take them himself and do What he pleases with them 3–A. Yes. Q. That is to say, he does not make a contract that he will take pay, but by his contract he may either take his fish or money 3–A. That is just it. - - Q. Well, do they do that ever; that is, take their own, fish 7–A. I have known instances where they took their own fish; where one of the crew was going home and he thought he could get more for the mackerel at home than it could be sold for there. (See eaplanatory note below.) Q. Now, what class of men constitute the fishing crews generally that go from Gloucester 3 "Of course we know that there are some bad men, but how are they as a general thing 2—A. I think they are a very good class of men indeed. t Q. It is common, is it, for men to change from the post of master or skipper to a hand 3–A. Yes, I have known instances where several skippers have been aboard our vessel. * Q. Ex-skippers, I suppose, we would call them. There have been Several, you say, on One vessel ?—A. Yes. Q. Are the modes of doing business, the rates and charges and that sort of thing, well understood in Gloucester 7—A. I think they are. Q. Well, is Gloucester a place where there is or can be any kind of monopoly or combination among the people who sell to the fishermen or furnish them or is it competition ?—A. Competition, decidedly so. Q. Now, I need not ask you the question, but is Gloucester a place in daily and hourly connection by railway, telegraph, and newspaper with the rest of the country. They have the morning and evening papers from Boston every day, don’t they 3–A. Yes. * Q. Now, I want you to tell me when a vessel comes in from her fish- ing—we have heard it in part, but tell me what is the course of business when she arrives at the wharf? In the first place, the wharf belongs to the owner or to some onwer?—A. Yes; the wharf belongs to the owner or fitter. A vessel may be owned by outside parties and come there to fit. - Q. There is no separate charge made for the use of the Wharf in those cases 2—A. No. Q. That goes into what the owner has to furnish 7–A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2613 Q. How is wharf property, high or low 2–A. Wharf property is very valuable is Gloucester. g - Q. I suppose that, like all property, it has decreased in value, owing to the general depression. Is that so or not ?—A. Well, I don’t know of any wharves that have been sold in Gloucester. Q. Well, it may be that wharf property has held its own more than property in houses and land. How do you think that is 3–A. I think it has not diminished so much as houses and lands up in town. Q. I suppose there is a limit of available wharf property. You have your harbor, and the wharf property must be cut out of that ?—A. Yes. Q. Now, when the vessel comes to the wharf, what is the first thing done º–A. The first thing done is that the mackerel are hoisted out of the vessel to the wharf. Q. By the crew 7–A. By the crew, with a hired horse. Q. They have got beyond hoisting it themselves?—A. Yes; as soon as it is landed each man knows his own fish by the private mark which has been put on the head of the barrel, and each stands by itself. The barrels are then unheaded by one of the crew and the fish pitched into the culling-crib, which is 23 feet wide and 4 feet long. At each end there is a culler—that is, a man who selects the mackerel as No. 1, 2, and 3. From this culling-crib they are thrown into the culling-tub, according as the culler regards them as No. 1, 2, or 3. Q. Who are those cullers ?–A. They are men experienced in that kind of business—men of good judgment, because you have to rely on the judgment of the culler, under our laws, in regard to the quality of the mackerel. It is left to his judgment. # Q. Well, the owner is bound by the act of the culler as well as the fisherman Ż–A. Certainly. * Q. Have they ever been rejected ?–A. I have not known of it. Q. These cullers are sometimes on one wharf and sometimes on another? —A. Yes. When these tubs are full enough, two of the crew take them and lift them on the scales, where they are weighed by the weigher. As soon as they are weighed he cries out “barrels one, two, three,” as the case may be, and the captain marks it on his memorandum-book. Then two of the crew empty the tub into the packing-crib, and there the crew's part of it ends. Then at the packing-crib it is packed in barrels and marked according to the grade. Then a half bushel of salt is put in with it, and the cooper takes it, puts in the head, and gives it a roll on the wharf. The barrel rolls down the wharf to where it is bored by the pickler. Q. That is, he makes a bung-hole 7—A. Yes; and then he puts a fun- nel in and pickles it. Then he allows it to stand awhile, and fills it up again until it is full of pickle. Then he brings it up, sets it on end, and it is branded with the deputy inspector's name and the grade of the fish. It is then turned out ready for market. Q. Are the crew usually present and taking an interest in this 7–A. Yes; they are right on hand until it is weighed off, and then they don’t care any more about it. - Q. Now, do the owners and outfitters of vessels keep shops for the sale of clothing and such things 7–A. No ; there is very little if any kept by the outfitters. It used to be so. Q. So these men who have clothes to purchase generally go to other places 7–A. Yes. Q. If they have cash or credit they make their own bargains? If they want the aid of the owner what do they do ?—A. They get an order on a storekeeper. 2614 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. And the owner then becomes responsible %–A. Yes. Q. Then after the voyage is up what clothing he has had is charged on his private account 3–A. Yes. - Q. Now, what does the owner get for the risk * He takes the risk of the life of the man and also of the catch not amounting to enough. What profit does he get for that ?—A. He gets a profit owing to the competition among the clothes-dealers. They allow a certain percent- age to the owner of the vessel for giving these orders. . . . Q. How much is that ? Is it based on the wholesale prices or as the bargain may be made?—A. It is based principally on the wholesale. prices. They sell to the outfitter at the wholesale prices and charge the goods to the men at the retail prices at the store. Q. The man knows what he will be charged on the outfitter's books?— A. Yes. ... • ! Q. Now, would it be possible for those who have neither credit nor cash to do any better than that ?—A.. I think not. Q. I suppose if they went without any credit or cash, or any one to become responsible in this way, they would hardly make a purchase at all ?–A. I think not. The risk is too great. As a general thing the storekeeper would rather have the order of the owner. Q. Now, in case any of the crew thinks anything is going wrong, and does not get satisfaction, are there not plenty of lawyers ready to take up their cases 3–A. It is to be assumed there are. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. I did not understand him to answer the question as to the outfit- ter’s profit on the stores furnished on his credit & The seaman gets his bill, with the rate put on the account to show him what he buys at 3–A. Yes. . . Q. That is what you call the retail rate. He can go from place to place 3—A. Yes. - Q. Now, having got his bill at the retail rate, it is given to him on the understanding that before he gets the clothes the bill must be indorsed?— A. EHe goes to the owner and says: “Here, I am going in your vessel and have no clothes. Give me, an Order on such and such a firm to get a suit of clothes or oiled clothes.” He takes that order and goes up. Eſe knows what the clothes are worth, and will not pay extravagant prices. Q. Now the question is what the outfitter gets as compensation for the risk 2–A. He gets a profit out of the manufacturer, or rather the whole- sale dealer. If he gives an order on Carter, a manufacturer of oiled clothes, Carter will sell them at the wholesale prices and charge them on the account at the retail prices to the man. Q. What is the percentage %—A. I could not form any accurate esti- Imate. Q. As nearly as you can say ?—A. Some will pay more than others. I don’t think the average is more than 8 per cent., perhaps 10. By Mr. Dana : Q. What would the articles be that the men would buy at the differ- ent stores?—A. Clothing. Tobacco they would get at the outfitter's St0re. * Q. The outfitter has tobacco?—A. Yes. - - Q. Do they buy anything but clothing in this way ?—A. I think not. They only buy what they actually need to fit them out to go on board. the vessel. - i - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2615 By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. In case their families require assistance, is there any custom of Sup- plying the families of the fishermen by the outfitters?—A. Yes; by let- ting them have supplies from the store and giving them cash. Q. Is that done upon half-pay orders, or anything of that sort"—A. No ; I never had an order from a man that went for me. If his wife came down I always let her have provisions. By Mr. Dana: Q. Do you think it is the custom to make advances either in cash or goods?—A. Yes, if they run up an account to more than the Voyage warrants, we check it. • Q. At what rate are those goods charged ?—A. I think the average would be 10 per cent. - Q. You mean 10 per cent. on what?—A. I refer to the provision Sup- plied to the families. I don’t think they will average as much as that. IBy Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Take, for instance, the case of a barrel of flour, or something of that sort, what would the percentage be on that ?—A. Well, a barrel of flour, when I was in the business, was $8 or $10. - Q. Is the percentage you name on which the goods are furnished a percentage over the retail prices 3–A. No, they could not go to the grocers and get it for cash any cheaper than under this arrangement. Q. How is the owner enabled to do that ? You say they are furnished at about the same rate for which they would get those supplies, paying Cash 7–A. Well, perhaps for a few months past the competition in gro- ceries has been so great that for cash you could purchase at any price you chose, and one grocer has gone up in consequence of that sort of trade. - X, - By Mr. Dana : Q. But in fair average times the owners allow the families about the rate that they could buy for with cash 7–A. Yes. Q. Where does the profit come from for the risk *—A.. I do not be- lieve they ever take that into consideration. Q. But, as a business transaction, they buy it at wholesale %–A. Yes. ~ Q. Then in these cases of goods allowed to the families is there any other profit than the difference between wholesale and retail?—A. No ; I don’t think there is, as far as my knowledge extends. I will not say for all the firms in Gloucester. There have been many cases where gro- ceries have been sold in this way to the families of men who have never come back. (On the following day the witness requested leave to make an explan- ation with regard to the right of one of the crew to take his share of the fish in place of its money value. The explanation is to the follow- ing effect: “The mackerel of the crew are all packed. If any one of the crew desires his share of fish instead of money, he can have it by paying expenses, by requesting it of the agent of the schooner before the trip is sold.”) f 2616 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. FRIDAY, October 12, 1877. The Conference met. Examination of Major LOW resumed. By Mr. Dana : - Question. Yesterday there was presented, but not explained at the time, a history of 27 vessels; did you prepare this?—Answer. Yes; I did. Q. This gives a history, does it, of a series of vessels—twenty-odd vessels—in a tabulated form. The first name is the Austerlitz, tonnage so much, number of hands so many; “fishing,” I believe, means cod- fishing 7—A. Yes; cod and halibut. Q. The average hands fishing, 8; mackereling, 14. This gives the history down to 1868, when she was sold * The statement also shows what became of each vessel, whether sold or lost. The first column gives the time engaged in cod and halibut fishing, the number of months and days each year, the time engaged in mackerel-fishing each year, the gross value of the catch each year, the vessel's share and the crew's share each year. The quantity of fish caught is put down in quintals or barrels, according as it is mackerel or cod. - s WITNESS. Might I be allowed to make an explanation regarding that ? When I presented it yesterday, I intended to present it before the sum- mary. The summary I presented in my evidence was a summary of those abstracts. \ Q. In the cost of a new schooner you gave yesterday, you had one item, “expense account.” Have you the broadside that was printed for the use of the Centennial %–A. I can get it. (The paper is produced, and explanation made that it cannot be put into the case, as it was taken out of a frame, having been used at the Centennal Exhibition, and brought here. It is a statement of the cost of a new schooner, built in 1875, fitted for the mackerel-fishing, ready for sea, 67 tons.) Q. This printed sheet was used at the Centennial 7–A. Yes; it was one of those framed and put around the tank in which we showed the models of fishing-schooners. t Q. Are these the same vessels you gave in that paper ?—A. Yes; I made a slight alteration for the mackerel-catcher. That was made to show the cost of a schooner to fish off our own shores, and I made a slight alteration to adapt it to the fishing in the gulf. Q. Yes; and then you afterwards gave the difference between the gulf-fishing vessels and a seiner on our own shores?—A. Yes. Q. I see you put the cost of fuel, light, and provisions at 40 cents a day. There has been some question whether that was not a large Sum.—A. It is based on an actual voyage. I have with me the original documents. I asked different owners of vessels who had new schooners in the differ- ent classes of fishing to furnish me with the cost of their schooners and such other information as they saw fit in relation to their Schooners. One of them gave me full details of the cost of running a schooner for the whole season. I have the original papers that he handed me. Q. I suppose you would not like to part with them 3–A. I should not like to, but, if required, I could put them in. Q. Now take the items that make this 40 cents per day per man.—A. Well, this vessel was engaged on the Grand Bank 302 days in the fresh- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 26.17 halibut fishing with 12 men for a crew, and this is her bill for provisions for 302 days: PROVISIONS. 11% tons coal.--------------------------------------------------------- $115 00 % cords Wood--------------------------------------------------- - - - - - 25 00 21 bbls, flour--------------------------------------------------------- 168 00 11 “ beef--------------------------------------------------------- 214 50 4+ “ pork shoulders.------------------- ------------------------. 89 25 3 “ pork--------------------------------------------------------- * 84 00 bu. beans --------------------------------------------------------- 10 00 60 lbs. rice----------------------------------------------------------- 6 00 71 lbs. tea------------------------------------------------------------ 35 50 ° bu, peas ---------------------------------------------------------- 5 00 68 gals, molasses ----------------------------------------------------- 40 80 6 “ Vinegar ------------------------------------------------------ 1 80 1017 lbs. Sugar --------------------------------------------------------- 106 78 152 lbs. d. apples.------------------- * * * * * * * * * * * is - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19 00 17 lbs. Cream tartar -------------------------------------------------- 8 50 31 lbs. Saleratus---------. ---. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * g e s m sº me • * * 3 10 72 galls, kerosene ---------------------------------------------------- 14 00 20 lbs. Spice---------------------------------------------------------- 10 00 49 lbs. Soap ---------------------------------------------------------- 4 90 9 lbs. mustard ------------------------------------------------------ 4 50 4 b. Ibs. pept. Sauce ------------------------------------------------- 80 Yeast cakes ------------------------------------------------------- 2 : 0 Bread preparation ------ ------------------------------------------ 6 ()0 Lamp chimneys --------------------------------------------------- 4 (#0 Table salt-----------------------------------------------, --------- 1 95 12 lbs. Candles --------------------------------------------------- - - - - 1 S0 7 do?. Wicks -------------------------------------------------------- 7 () * Bristol bricks ----------------------------------------------------- 20 7 rolls stove polish -------------------------------------------------- 7 120 lbs. bread.----------------------------------------- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 12 ()0 31 lbs. Coffee ---------------------- ---------------------------------- s 7 75 88 bush potatoes ---------------------------------------------------- 66 40 6 bush, onions ---------------------------------- -------------------- 12 00 3 bush beets ------------------------------------------------------- 3 00 4 bush. turnips------------------------------------------------------ 4 00 5 gross matches----------------------------------------------------- 12 00 450 lbs. lard ---------------------------------------------------------- 76 50 490 lbs. butter ---------------------------------------- * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 147 00 313 lbs, fresh meat.--------------------------------------------------- 31 30 Vegetables-------------------------------------------------------- 30 00 200 bbls. Water -----------, ------------------------------------------- 40 00 1,426 03 I have all the charges for that vessel that year. - *. Q. They live pretty well on board these vessels?—A. Yes; it is a well- known fact that they fare well on board the American schooners. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. This is what the 40 cents per day is founded upon ?–A. Yes. I may observe that the peas seem pretty high, but they used split peas, most of them. - By Mr. Dana : Q. Now, is that a fair average cost for fitting out a vessel for that time 3–A. I think it is; because I know others have figured it up to 45 CentS. ... • Q. Now, how do you make out the 40 cents a day ? You haven’t given us that.—A. Well, it is got by dividing $1,426.03, the total cost, by the number of men and the number of days. It is a fraction less than 40 cents. Q. But there are some of those things that are not consumed. I sup- pose they are destroyed. Of course there is more or less waste—such, 2618. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION, for instance, as chimneys for lamps.-A. Well, they are breaking all the time. There would not be much of that left when they got home from their voyage. ^ by Sir Alexander Galt: - - Q. That is a cod-fishing voyage?—A. Cod and halibut. It would apply to the Grand Banks or the Western Banks. All classes of vessels average about the Same. - - Q. Now, the trawl-gear is put down on this broadside as $1,000 and a small fraction. Have you the items of that ?—A. I have. They are as follows: f - - VeSSel. 71 tons, cost $8,800. Fitted for trawling halibut. TRAWL-GEAR. Twine ----------------------------------------- * - e s m r * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * $5 00 8 baskets------------------------------------------------------------------ 6 40 22 buoys ------------------------------------------------------------------ 11 00 20 buckets---------------------------------------------------------------- 5 00 40 files ------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 58 1,483 pounds ground-lines.------------------------------------------------- 444 90 346 pounds ganging-lines -------------------------------------------------- . . 410 72 20 knives ----------------------------------------------------------------- 15 60 1° Stones --------------------- * = º gº ºn tº º ------------------------------------- 75 3° stafſs------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 25 360 pounds buoy-line ------------------------------------------------------ 64 80 4 dozen brooms------------------------------------------------------------ 9 60 52 gross hooks -----. ---------------------------------------- -------------- 109 20 23 pounds lobster-twine --------------------------------------------------- 8 05 5 dories------------------------------------------------------------------- 130 00 Iron and copper tacks ---------------------------------------------------- 1 27 4 shovels------------------------------------------------------------------ 3 00 Anchors- - - - - -------------------------------------------------------------- 40 00 Qars and scoops.---------------------------------------------------------- 47 13: - 1,023 25 Any explanation in regard to this that may be required I can give. Some of the terms used are technical. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg: Q. There is a term ganging-lines.—A. That is the small line to which the hooks are fastened. By Mr. Dana : Q. Now, you have here in this broadside the vessel's expense account, $1,823.85. Do they call that an expense account º Is that the way they entitle it on the books in making up the account”—A. No ; it is all put in One account; all the things for the vessel are put in one account. These were separated for this special purpose. - w Q. Now, you take this expense account; what period of time does it cover ?—A. Three hundred and two days. * * Q. Now, what are the items of the vessel's expense aceount 3–A. They are as follows: VESSEL’S EXPENSE. Spunyarn ---------------------------------------------------------------- $748, Parcelling-------- ~ * = w - sº e º 'º º ºs º ºs º-º º ºs º ºn as sº ºr sº um º ºs- º ºs º & e º sº e ------------------ ---...--- - 23 00 Leather----------------------------------- .* ºn tº e um ºn me sº is sº sº as º ºs ºs º ºs-ºs tº ------------ 11; 29 Jib hanks.----------. -- ------------------------------------------ - - - - - - - - - - 1: .30. Nails------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * sº sº º ºs & sº º ºs º ºs us tº dº º ºs º ºr --- - - - ------- 1 32. Tinware, &c -------------------------------------------------------- ... e. g.º.º. º. º. 2 º' . 79 50 1 anchor lost -- - - - - * : * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * - * * * * * * º ºs e º me tº '... • * * * * * tº sº º sº ºn tº gº º sº º sº º- us is ºf 48 96. Topmast (broken).------------------------------------------------- •gº sº gº º º ºs º . 12 00 Paint and painting----------------------------------------- -- a - - - - - - - - - - - - 90: 00: Railway fee---------------------------------------- ---------------------- $15 00 Rigger ------------------------------------------------------------------ 47 00. Blacksmith .----...----."- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , as as sº as * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 60 00 Carpenter----------------------------- ... • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 65 00 Sailmaker's repairs.----------------------------------------------------- 163 00 Lumber for ice-house.--------------------------------------------------. - . 43 00 Insurance------------------ sº sº sº sº, º sº sº as tº sº sº tº as as is ºn is sº * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * g º is º ºs 539 00 Commissions to skipper ---...--... • * * * * * * * * * ~ * * * * * * * * * = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * - - - 465 00 40 tons ballast------------------------------------------------------------ 80 00 Swivel gun---------------------------------------------------- w w - - - - - - - - sº 38 00 Tarring rigging, &c.------------------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '- - - - - - - - - - - 14 00 1, 823 85 Q. Jib hanks are put in ; they are part of the original furniture ?— A. I know; but they break some, probably, and have to be repaired. Q. You put in “Marine Railway "?—A. Well, all the vessels in Glou- Cester are painted on the Marine Railway. - Q. How many have you in town 3–A. Six. Q. They are hauled up there for repairs?—A. Yes. Q. The insurance is for that period of 302 days 2—A. Yes. Q. They are insured in a mutual fishing-office 3–A. Yes. Q. I believe it was explained that that mutual office was got up by fishermen and owners for their own benefit, and conducted on principles peculiar to themselves that were thought to be most beneficial. They Clon’t insure in the Boston offices 2—A. No, not now ; the rates were too high for them. - By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. I understood this was an actual case for a particular vessel ?—A. }. the name of the vessel is the Victor, belonging to Joseph O. r0Ctor. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Is the sum put in for insurance the actual sum paid 3–A. Yes. . By Mr. Dana : -- Q. Do you know how old a vessel she was ?—A. She was built in the . year previous. I don't know what time of the year. By Sir Alexander Galt: - Q. This statement was prepared for the Centennial 7–A. Yes; it was prepared for the Centennial, but we did not have room for it to go in the space we had at the time at our disposal, and therefore we had to make the abstract which is contained in the printed broadside. By Mr. Dana : - - Q. You gave us your statement for the depreciation of the vessel ?— A. Yes. Q. Did that include repairs 2—A. Yes, sir. Q. You put them into the depreciation ?—A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, that is considering the depreciation of the vessel to be the amount laid out on her from year to year for repairs. But there will be a little more depreciation than that, would not there 2 In point of fact, is not the depreciation of the vessel a little larger than the amount that Would be required to repair her ?—A. O, yes. Q. For instance, the substantial part of the ship, the hull from the keelson all the way up, even if that does not require repairs, still if it is of a certain number of years of age it will not sell as well as if new 2– A. No, sir. 2620 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Something lies in the fancy that a new vessel is worth more than an old one?—A. There would be that. * * Q. The next item here (on the broadside) is general charges, ice, bait, salt, &c. These you have given us, haven’t you ?—A. No ; they are called miscellaneous charges. They are as follows: Miscellaneous charges. 200 tons ice-------------------------------------------------------------- $600 00 Bait---------------------------------------- •e º ºs s = º sm º ºs º ºs º ºs tº sº gº º g sº sº s ºs sº gº ºn tº as ºn tº 354 O0 Straw for bait------------------------------------------------------------ 10 00 55 pair of nippers.----------------------------- ------------------------- 27 50 Towage---------------------------------------------------------------- -- 50 00 75 lbs. powder....../- = •s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18 00 Medicine ---------------------------------------------------------------- 25 00 Oil clothes, one man------------------------------------------------------ 15 00 18 hºlds. Salt--------------------------- ---------------------------------- 36 00 1,135 50 Q. Can you give us the average life of a fishing-vessel ? I don’t mean hów long she will remain a hulk, but take her from the time she is built until she ceases to be fit to go.—A. I could not, right off, but I could figure it out very shortly. Q. Perhaps you don’t care to give us a guess?—A. No. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. I see you are leaving this item respecting the cost. I understood him to say he would give us the result of the year's work of the vessel. By Mr. Dana : Q. It is on that broadsheet, is it?—A. There is a recapitulation there on the broadside. (Reads.) FECAPITULATION, • Trawl-gear ------------------------------------------------------------- $1,023 25 Vessel's expense account -----------. -----------------------------------. 1,823 85 Provisions, &c ------------------------------------------ s sº sº º sº tº as as me sº me as e º ºs ºr 1,426 03 General charges------------------------------- • s = s. sº tº º sº sº º ºs º e s sº sº ºn tº e º se º º sº tº dº 1, 135 50 Total cost of running ----------------------------------. * * * * * * * * * * 5,408 63 Dy Mr. Davies: Q. What was the owner's share?—A. $5,798.65, and the expenses on that were $5,408.63. Then she made about $390. - By Mr. Dana : Q. Now, you say that leaves a small profit to the owners ?—A. Yes. Q. Now, in making up the charges against the vessel, in the owner’s account, he credits himself with that $5,000, which is his share of the catch after deducting certain expenses. You charge them enough against the ship to leave a small balance. You charge against it, of course, the provision account, and the account for repairs 2—A. Yes; it is all charged in one account without any division. Q. Then, charging the repairs and charging the provision account, you leave that result, do you ?—A. Yes, sir. Q. Then, how do you include a fair compensation to the owner for the use of his wharf and buildings and his own time 2—A. That is a profit he gets out of the fish after they are landed. Q. There is no special charge made for them 7–A. No ; not to the vessel. - - Q. Well, is there any charge for depreciation on the vessel beyond AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2621 the expenses of the repairs that are put upon her in that period of time 2—A. No. Q. You make no charge for depreciation, but you take it to be equal to the amount of the repairs 7–A. Well, I presume so. * By Mr. Foster: Q. In the hypothetical case, yesterday, you allowed $550 for depreci- ation for the year; that $550, I understand, will have to pay for the repairs ?—A. Yes; I intended that to cover in the same proportion for the whole year. Q. How much is charged for repairs in these items you give that make up the amount in the broadside º–A. It would seem that $100 Would be the amount included in that for repairs. & By Mr. Dana : - Q. Then it is perfectly understood that there is no special charge in Connection with the vessel for the use of the capital—what we call now the plant, the wharf and building which are his investment—but that he gets his compensation for all that in whatever charges are made for the provisions, fitting, &c. 3—A. Yes. - Q. Well, these men who are engaged in the fishing business in Glou- Cester, are they workingmen themselves?—A. Yes. Q. Or are they men who put in their capital and let others take care of it 2—A. No ; they are workingmen. Q. In what sense are they workingmen 2—A. Well, most of them go on the wharf and work just the same as a laborer on the wharf. They See to everything, and lend a hand when it is needed. Q. Are they usually men who have had experience either in that busi- ness or as fishermen themselves?—A. They have. Q. Now, would it be possible, do you think, from your long experience, for a man to make a living if he simply invested his capital, as a sort of fancy merchant, looking in at times to see how things went, if he didn’t give his personal attention to the business, and do a fair day’s work Overseeing it 3–A. You mean whether he would get a living out of it." I think not. Q. Are there any such cases down there?—A. You mean vessel-owners, I presume 2 No. Q. Take the case of persons who don’t themselves look after the work, but merely invest capital in the fishing and have others looking after it. Is there such a thing as that known in Gloucester ?—A. No. Q. It would not be an investment of any account if you undertook to invest your money and leave others to take care of it?—A. I don’t know about that. I don’t know any instance where it is done. Q: What is your opinion ? Have you a clear opinion ?—A. My opin- ion is that they would not make a great deal on their investments. Q: What do you mean 7–A. Well, I mean that they would not get a Very large percentage. Q. Do you think they would get anything 3–A. I think they would get a fair interest on it. Q. Would they get more than that ?—A. No, I don’t think they would. Q. Perhaps you didn’t understand me ; I don’t mean where a person lets his capital to owners, because in that case they will pay interest ; but Suppose he was to invest his money in a fishing-vessel, simply pay- ing for his share ?—A. As I understand, you ask whether the owners and fitters of vessels in Gloucester make anything in their business % Q. No, because they incorporate skill and give their daily labor to the Work. But take the case where a man simply pays for his share in a fish- 2622 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. ing-vessel and gives no attention to the business. Take the case of a non-resident. For instance, suppose I should buy a tenth part of a ves- sel and pay my proper share of the expenses, but put in no skill Or atten- tion or time of my own 3–A.. I think you would lose it. * - : Q. Are there any such cases now that you know of, at Gloucester, where people have simply invested in that way, incorporating no care, attention, time, labor, or skill of their own 3–A, I don’t know of any. Q. Do you know of an attempt of that sort at Salem 3–A.. I do. Q. How long ago 7–A.. I can’t exactly tell. . It is within ten years. Q. What was it, a sort of joint-stock company ?—A. Yes. Two firms moved from Gloucester with their vessels and formed a stock Company. Q. Were they capable, competent men 7–A. Yes. - Q. There were no frauds you know of 3–A. No. Q. Now, to show what the opinion is generally of the value of one of these vessels, is it difficult or not to get money on mortgage at fair rates on a fishing-vessel ?—A. No ; I think they would have to pay an extra rate of interest. - - - Q. Are there many such cases of mortgages of vessels?—A. O, yes; I presume so. - . - . ." - Q. Do you know what interest they have to pay ?—A. I don’t. Q. Now, as to selling vessels, is it an easy thing to sell a fishing-vessel, if a man, for instance, desired to go out of the fishing business; is it a thing that can be depended upon 7–A. No ; there is always a great sac- rifice where vessels are sold at a forced sale. sº. Q. I don’t mean a forced sale; but suppose he takes time enough, and gives notice, and sells at a fair open auction sale, is there a loss gener- ally 3––A. There is usually. 4 Q. And in settling up estates, how do vessels usually turn out 3–A. As a general thing, poorly; during the war there were times when ves- sel property sold to advantage. - Q. For paper ?—A. Yes. Q. Now, is the reason of this that these vessels, being built specially for fishing-vessels, they can’t profitably be run except by persons who will incorporate in the fishing business their own time and attention and skill ?—A. Yes. Q. An outside purchaser does not want to buy them?—A. No. Q. Explain to the Commission how codfish are now packed and salted. —A. When the crew have been settled with, and the fish have been weighed, they are pitched into a dory filled by one man from a pump ; eight men wash the fish, and after they are washed they throw them into a wheelbarrow and they are wheeled into the fish-house and deliv- ered there to a salter, who salts them, and he has one man to bring him the salt. They take four bushels of salt to a butt, and that gang will take care of fifty butts in a day; then they are kept in the butts not less than ten days, after which they are water-hawsed, by being taken from the butts and piled up in piles about three feet high, to drain the pickle from them ; this takes two men, and they were employed nine days on the trips I have in my mind; fifty butts a day are two men's work. / - - * * : By Sir Alexander Galt: - Q. How many quintals are there in a butt 7–A. There are about eight Quintals to a butt. Then after they come from being water-hawsed they are spread on flakes to dry; it takes four men two days to wheel them out, i. e., fifty butts. The flakes have three-cornered strips nailed on frames resting on horses, in such a way that the frames can be taken AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2623 down and packed away; while they are drying on the flakes it takes four men to tend them, and wheel them in and pile them up after they are dry. - * - - - Q. Now they are dried codfish. What is the custom now as to pre: paring them for market? The merchants of Gloucester have made Gloucester the distributing point. It used to be Boston 7–A. Yes; they send them to all parts of the United States direct. They take these fish and cut the tails off, strip them of their skin, and take their back-bone out. That is called boneless cod. Then some of them split it lengthwise, and others roll them up into rolls, cut them across the roll, and stand them upon end in boxes. There are several different ways of arranging them in the boxes. - Q. What is the usual size of those boxes º–A. They are 10, 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100 pounds. Q. Now, they send those boxes all the way from 10 to 100 pounds. Formerly codfish were all sold whole, were they not ?—A. Yes. Q. How long has this custom of trimming them and packing them in boxes been in existence %–A. Since 1870. Q. Has it been found successful?—A. Yes; because it has opened up a greater market for the codfish. Before that their bulk prevented their being distributed so well. Now, being in a portable shape, they go all over the Union. Anywhere they can transport a box of bread they can transport a box of fish. It makes labor for a great many hands. Q. Now Gloucester has been, as we have seen by its statistics, with certain fluctuations, a place of considerable pecuniary resources justify- ing a considerable valuation. Will you be so good as to tell the Com- mission what resources there are in Gloucester to account for the Valu- ation of its property, besides what is traceable to the fishing business All the work of the merchants in connection with the handling of the fish, we allow to go in as a part of the fishing industry.—A. There are marine railways. - Q. I don’t care about that. You say you have half a dozen perhaps, mainly supported by the fishing business.-A. We have others coming from other places for repairs, which makes iabor for calkers and painters. Q. Then you have large vessels that go to the Mediterranean, Portu- gal, and the West Indies?—A. Some few ; not much of that. We have an extensive salt business. * Q. Take the granite, for instance; what is the valuation of the granite business of Gloucester 7—A. The industrial pursuits of Gloucester pro- duce a million and a half per afinum outside of the fisheries. Q. Granite is one of the principal ones”—A. Yes. - Q. You have an unlimited supply of granite, I suppose ?—A. Yes. Q. I mean something that you can cut, that lies in quarries?—A. Yes. Our valuation is largely increased by it. - Q. In the first place there is a great deal of quarrying going on and a great many men employed in quarrying stone º–A. Yes. - Q. That stone is used for pavements in the cities and for house-build- ing 4–A. Yes; it finds a good market. Q. A good many vessels are employed carrying it, or do you send it by rail º–A. No ; it is sent by steamers and vessels. Q. Gloucester exports its granite as prepared from the quarries in the neighborhood º–A. Yes. . . . Q. Are there any other reasons for the increase in the valuatiºn 3—A. Well, summer residences bring in considerable. - Q. You mean persons who do business and whose personal property 2624 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. and investments are elsewhere 2—A. Yes, and who have summer resi- dences in Gloucester. - Q. That is because of the salubrity of the climate, and the ocean scenery? There has been a great deal of that ?—A. Yes. Q. Parts of Gloucester have been built up entirely 3–A. Yes. Q. Manchester and Magnolia 3–A. Yes. Q. Then down towards Eastern Point Light”—A. Well, there are four or five summer boarding-houses there. Q. Then you have summer boarding-houses, and the hotels in summer depend to a large extent on summer boarders ?—A. Yes. Q. Now, has all that led to an increase in the value of lands 3–A. Yes. Q. The soil is not very fertile, I believe?—A. No. It is rocky. Q. And, as I recollect, there is not a great quantity of it 3–A. No. Q. Its value, independent of what is given to it as a place of summer residence, would be small ?–A. I think it would. Q. Now, do you recollect anything else besides what you have men- tioned—granite, outside business, and summer residence 2 Are there cases of men in Boston, whose business is in Boston, and whose real bona-fide home is there, but who yet reside in Gloucester long enough to pay taxes there?—A. Yes. Q. In some cases, men of very large fortune?—A. Yes. Q. A man died there the other day worth a couple of millions or so. He was a manufacturer and general merchant living in Boston 3– A. Yes. o Q. One question about insurance. Does that company which you speak of insure to the full value of the vessel ?—A. They do not. Q. Do you recollect to what proportion ?—A. Yes. - Q. Do you recollect whether it is three-fourths or seven-eighths 3– A. I won’t say positively. Q. But there is a portion that the owner has to pay himself?—A. Yes. Q. Do they pay every loss, or only over a certain percentage of the value 2–A. Only over a certain percentage. I think it is 12 per cent. Q. At all events, whatever the percentage, there may be a series of losses that the owner has to bear himself, that do not amount to enough to make a partial loss?—A. No. If they are run into, for instance, and damaged by one another, they do not get anything, unless it is over a certain percentage of the value. Q. Have you a copy of the fishing articles of Gloucester fishermen 3– A. No. Q. Can you state from your own knowledge of their provisions, or how they have ever been construed, as to the legal right of the men to take their own fish, subject to the incumbrances. Do you know how that is ?—A. No. The cases of fishermen wanting to take his own fish are very rare indeed. They are always satisfied with the settlement they make with the OWners. . . g Q. We should like to have the book which contains the by-laws of the insurance company; also, a copy of the cod-fishing articles and mackerel-fishing articles. That would be interesting.—A. I will send them. Q. There was a man named Joseph Campbell, of Souris, Prince Ed- ward Island, examined as a witness. He was asked : “In 1860 what vessel did you go in 7" and answered, “ the Daniel McPhee.” He was asked: “Where did you go?” and answered, “We went to the bay. We landed and took dories and went up to Seven Islands again. There We got 80 barrels at the same place as before. From that we went further up to a place called Boubou, and got twenty or thirty barrels there close AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2625 to the shore. We then crossed to the southern side to Griffin's Cove and picked up about twenty or thirty barrels there. We then crossed to Gaspé, then to Bay Chaleurs, picking up more or less every day. We Were line-fishing then. We gave up the boats after leaving Seven Is- lands. We went to North Cape, Prince Edward Island, to finish our trip. We made only one trip and went home.” Then he was asked: “What was your catch 3° and answered, “We got 280 barrels; that was in 1860.” Then he was asked: “Did you take them outside the limits” ” and an- swered, “We did some.” Then to the question, “What proportion?” he answered, “Sixty or seventy barrels at the outside.” Now you have been requested to examine into this matter. Have you any personal knowledge of the Daniel McPhee ?–A. I owned a portion of her in 1860. Q. You may state from your own knowledge what was the truth of that matter ?–A. To the best of my knowledge Joseph Campbell was not in the Schooner. She landed 17 barrels of mackerel, and was gone about three months. Q. That you state of your own knowledge 2–A. Yes. Q. You mean that was the whole trip 7–A. That is what she packed Out. - - I § Have you looked to see whether this man was in the vessel ?—A. abVé. Q. There was no such man 7–A. No, sir; I can give you the names of the crew if you want them. - Q. No matter. Now, the same witness is asked, and answers as fol- lows: - Q. In 1861, what did you do?—A. I was in the R. H. Oakes, Captain Nasen. Q. What time did you come down 2–A. The 15th of July. Q. Was that early 3–A. It is not early. It is a fair time. We did not find them bite where we first fished, and we went up to Bay Chaleurs. We got about 120 barrels there—about 90 barrels inside and the rest outside. Q. That would be 30 barrels outside 3—A. Yes, about that. We fished off Miscou and got about 20 or 30 barrels off shore. We then came down the shore to Escu- minac, and picked up more or less every day along the shore. * Q. Close in or off?—A. Close in. , Q. Where did you get your next catch 3—A. We got 5 or 6 barrels along the shore to the leeward of the island (Prince Edward Island). There we got 70 or 80 barrels in One day, close in. Q. Within the limits 2—A, Between two and three miles. Q. What was the total result 2—A. One hundred and thirty barrels. Q. What did you do with them 2–A. We took them back to Gloucester. Q. Did you make only one trip º–A. I made only one trip in her. I left her at Giott- CeSter. Q. What were fish bringing then 2–A. They were low. In 1861 mackerel brought from $12 to $13 and $14 a barrel. That was the year the war broke out. -> Q. Now, can you tell us about the R. H. Oakes and this man Camp- bell?—A. The R. H. Oakes in 1861 fitted about the last of June and returned October 26. The vessel packed out 225% barrels of mackerel, from which Campbell's share was $39.01. Q. He was on board that time?—A. Yes; the number ones of this trip sold for $7; number twos, $51, ; and the number threes at $3. Q. Then the same witness is asked, and answers as follows: Q. Did you fish any more that year?—A. I went home and fished on the home shore; that is, the American shore, in the fall of 1862, in the Daniel McPhee. Q. What did you catch there ?—A. We caught 40 barrels. - Q. Now, what can you tell us about fishing on the American Shore in the Daniel McPhee, in the fall of 1862?—A. In 1862 the Schooner Dan- iel McPhee packed out on the fall trip, from October 4 to November 8, 135 barrels of mackerel. 165 F 2626 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What do you make of his statement that it was 40 barrels —A. I can’t make anything out of it. Q. Now, there is a man, Ronald McDonald. On page 396 of the tes- timony he is asked and answers as follows: Q. Have you fished in American vessels 3—A. Yes. Q. How many years ?–A. About seven summers. Q. When did you first go ih an American schooner ?—A. About 1859 or 1860. Q: What is the name of the first vessel?—A. Daniel McPhee, Gloucester, Daniel McPhee, captain. Q. Where did you fish 7–A. We began to fish along the island toward North Cape, Prince Edward Island. - Q. And you fished along at all the usual places?—A. Yes. * º Q. What did you catch that year?—A. About 200 barrels for the season. Q. How far from shore did you usually fish 7–A. We fished mostly all over the bay. The principal part of the fish we got on the Canada shore and Cape Breton shore and along the island. We caught, a few on Bank Bradley, and some up northward, about Margaree. The principal part we got on the Cape Breton shore. - Now, can you tell us anything about this man in the Daniel McPhee, either in 1859 or 1860?–A. In 1859 she was on the stocks. Q. Did she afterwards go off under command of Daniel McPhee?— A. Yes. - Q. With what result 2—A. The first trip was 17 barrels of mackerel, of which Ronald McDonald’s share was 35 cents. On the second trip she got 1224, and Ronald McDonald was not one of the crew. Q. Now, there is a deponent named William H. Molloy, whose affi- davit was put in on behalf of the British Government. He says: The result of my last year's operations is as follows: Total catch thirty-seven hundred quintals for the season, three Banking trips; value thereof about seventeen thousand dollars; expenses of wages, crew’s share of voyage, outfit and provisions was about twelve thousand dollars, leaving a clear profit to the owner of about five thousand dollars. The owner derives a considerable profit also from the difference between the prices he allows the crews for their share of fish, and what it is worth to him in the market, by which he would gain on the quantity above stated about eighteen hundred dollars. What have you to say to that ?—A. I think that Captain Mulloy does not seem to understand his business. In the first place he exaggerates the number of vessels that are on the Banks from Gloucester, and then he goes on and gives an account of the profits. . Take his own state- ment. I have made up a little memorandum. The expenses of the ves- sel, he says, are $12,000; shrinkage and cost of curing 3,700 quintals, at $1 per quintal, is $3,700, which gives $15,700. It sells 30,132 quin- tals, dry, for $4.80 per quintal, equal to $14,462.40, leaving a loss of $1,237.60 instead of $6,800 gain. Q. Then you say his own calculation does not produce the results?— A. Not What he states. Q. In point of fact, has he made his statement correctly 2—A. I should say that 3,700 quintals of codfish caught by a vessel one season was a very large catch, and to make three trips, and make a full aver- age each trip, is a remarkably successful year's voyage. Q. Then he speaks of the difference between the price allowed the crew for their share of the fish, and what it is worth in the market, and says the owner would gain on the quantity above stated about $1,800. If he takes the value of the fish in the same state in which they are landed they are worth no more to the owners than the crew 2–A. No. Q. Their superior value is the result of labor and skill afterward put upon them 3–A. Yes. Fish are never bought in Gloucester, to my knowledge, by the quintal from a vessel. The price of fish last year was $2.75 per 100 pounds from the vessel, green. Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2627 Dy Mr. Whiteway: - Q. IS not that a quintal 3–A. 114 pounds are a quintal. By Mr. Dana: Q. He further says: - The owner in my case above cited settled with the crew at two dollars and seventy- five cents per quintal as weighed out of the vessel, the market value of which fish when cured was four dollars eighty cents per quintal; the loss in weight, which is very trifling, and labor in curing, would not cost more than one dollar per quintal. A. I took his own figures when I made my estimate. Q. Is that a correct statement”—A. I took his statement for that. By Sir Alexander Galt : - ©. Q. How do you think it is ?—A. I don’t suppose it is a great way out of the way, taking into consideration the rent of the wharf and so forth. IBy Mr. Dana : # Q. About $1 per quintal 7–A. I should think so. I have not figured it up to get it exactly, but he is not a great way out of the Way. Q. Is there anything else in his statement?—A. He makes a compari- son of two vessels; one under the Washington Treaty with the privilege of going into Newfoundland and buying fresh bait, and he reckons that that vessel would make three trips a season, while the vessel not under the Washington Treaty, and restricted from going in there, would only make one trip. * Q. What has the Washington Treaty to do with the right to go in there and buy bait"—A. I don’t know. - * Q. Suppose it had, what has that to do with three trips ?—A. It is a fallacious statement in regard to three trips in comparison with one, because I think our vessels will make as many trips without the privi- lege of going into Newfoundland as they can with it. By Mr. Davies: Q. You have spoken of the statements made by Captain Campbell and Roland McDonald with regard to the vessel called Daniel McPhee ?— A.. I have. Q. Are you owner of the vessel ?—A. I was. ‘Q. And you have your books here?—A. I have not. Q. When were you requested to look up the accuracy of Campbell's Statement—since you came here 2–A. No, in Gloucester. Q. And what did you do in order to test its accuracy? I suppose, regarding that portion where he states where the fish were taken, you have nothing to say ?—A. No. Q. }º deny the accuracy of the statement that so many were taken 2 —A. O. *... Q. Have you a statement of the names of the crew for the year 2—A. I have a statement of the crew’s names on that first trip. The names are as follows: Daniel McPhee, master; Ronald McDonald, Michael McDonald, H. , Sinclair, Alex. Cameron, George M. Reed, Joseph McDonald, Joseph McPhee, John Rogérs, Joseph Silva, Daniel McIntire, William Wilder West, Thomas Johnson, Paul McNeil. She landed her Clories when she returned with that trip. Q. Having been requested to examine the accuracy of this statement, did you take the trouble to look at your books for more than one year to See whether there had been a mistake in the year 2–A. I did. Q: What did you find º–A. I did not find any. Q. Will you give me a statement of the returns made by the vessel 2628 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. for the year preceding and following 2—A. In 1861 he testified he was on the R. H. Oakes, another of my vessels. ...” Q. I ask you to give me the return of the vessel in 1861?—A. I don’t understand what you mean by return. - Q. A statement of the number of barrels of mackerel landed ?–A. I can give you the number of barrels of mackerel landed. Q. And the names of the crew in her ?—A. Yes. Q. I observe you have your book with you ?—A. Yes; my trip-book. for 1861 and 1862, not for 1860. Q. You did not bring the book for the year in regard to which we are speaking 2—A. The book is not in existence. Q. How did you get at this?—From my journal. Q. Did you bring your journal 7–A. I did not. Q. You did not bring the book itself relating to the very year on which this man testified, and the correctness of whose testimony you dispute?—A. No. - • Q. You brought a book relating to the following year 2—A. The only trip-book I had. Q. You brought a book for the following year 2—A. For the follow- ing two years. - Q. Did it not strike you as a little curious that, when asked to dis- pute the accuracy of a man's statement, you should dispute it and bring a book relating to the following year to that in question, and leave the book at home that would settle the question ?—A. I thought that my evidence and the list of the crew would be enough. I am on my oath. Q. So was Campbell. Why did you bring the book for the next year } You Were not asked to verify or dispute any statement for the next year?—A. No. Q. Why did you omit to bring the book for the year respecting which you Were asked to contradict Campbell's statement º–A. I brought the trip-book which shows the catches of mackerel. Q. You Say you lost the previous trip-book?—A. He was in another Wessel of mine afterward. Q. If you have lost that trip-book, how are you able to tell exactly What Catch he made 7–A. It is entered in my journal. Q. IS each man’s account transferred to the journal 3–A. Yes. Q. So that the journal would have done just as well as the trip- book 3–A. It is a heavier and more bulky book. Q. But it would have all the information ?—A. I presume it would. I tºº have brought it, but I had Mr. Steele's books, which are very eavy. • Q. I notice that Capt. Joseph Campbell, of Souris, who was examined very nearly the beginning of this Commission, and Ronald McDonald, who was called toward the close, there being, I think, four or five weeks between the times at which they were called, testified on oath the facts respecting that vessel, and with the exception of the number of barrels Spoken to by them, on which there is only a small difference, they agree with regard to the trip, the places where the mackerel were taken, and everything 7–A. Yes. - Q. I fancy there must be some explanation of the matter, and there must be a mistake about the year 2—A. Here is the record for 1861. The vessel was not built in 1859. Q. Campbell said: We went to the bay. We landed and took dories and went up to the Seven Islands' again. There we got 80 barrels at the same place as before. From that we went further up to a place called Boubon and got twenty or thirty barrels there close to the AWARD OF TEIE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2629. shore. We then crossed to the southern side, to Griffin's Cove, and picked up about twenty or thirty barrels there. We then crossed to Gaspé, then to Bay Chaleurs, pick- ing up more or less every day. We were line-fishing then. We gave up the boats after leaving Seven Islands. We went to North Cape, Prince Edward Island, to finish our trip. We made only one trip, and went home. Q. What light will the book for 1861 throw on the matter ?—A. It merely gives the names of the crew and what they caught. The vessel was not built in 1859. Q. One of the witnesses stated that fishermen sometimes enter them- selves under different names. Is that a fact within your knowledge?— A. They sometimes do. Q. It is possible Campbell may have entered himself under a different name in that vessel ?—A. That is true. - Q. Is this the return of the trips into the bay, or of the trips on your shore?—A. The trips to the bay; on the other side is a return of shore trips. - Q. Are those Mr. Steele's books?—A. No ; my own. Q. How are you able to state at this distance of time which refers to bay and which to shore trips, with the trips not divided ?–A. By the time of year. Q. The shore trips will be after the vessels return in October 2—A. Yes. Q. It seems by this that the vessel took 80 barrels on the shore. That is just what Campbell said: Q. Only 40 barrels. That was in 1861 that you got 80 barrels there in the fall trip, and in 1862 you got 40 barrels?—A. Yes. - •. That is right, within six barrels 2—A. In the fall of 1861 was he in the Daniel McPhee? Is his name among the crew for that shore-trip 2 Q. His name does not appear here (in the book). If he was there he must have been under another name 3–A.. I don’t think he was in her in the fall trip. Does he say he was with Captain Hunter ? Mr. DAVIES. The preceding questions were the following: Q. Did you fish any more that year 2—A. I went home and fished on the home-shore, 9 that is, the American shore, in the fall of 1862, in the Daniel McPhee. Q. What did you catch there ?—A. We caught 40 barrels. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Do you know Campbell?—A. I don’t remember him; I would know him if I saw him. By Mr. Davies: Q. Do you know whether the Daniel McPhee made more than one shore-trip in the fall of 1862?—A. In 1862, from July 27 to October 4, she was bay-fishing; from October 4 to November 8, shore-fishing. Q. Do your vessels, fishing on your shore, make short or long trips ?— A. Sometimes short and sometimes long. Q. If the vessel made two trips, his statement may be perfectly con- sistent with yours ?—A. She was only employed in 1862 one month and four days on the shore. Q. He says about three weeks. Is it not possible she may have made two trips ?—A. I don’t know. Q. Is Captain McPhee at Gloucester 7—A. He is dead. Q. What is your impression with regard to the statements made by these two men, corroborating each other substantially, and made at dif- ferent times?—A. My impression is that they are mistaken altogether in regard to their catch and where they fished. 2630 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. How would you know where they fished; you were not there ?— A. No. - Q. Therefore you cannot know personally; why, then, do you make that statement 3–A. Because, in the fall of the year, on the second trip, they never got it at Seven Islands with dories, and she landed her dories when she came home on her first trip. - Q. Campbell says they commenced the trip at Seven Islands; are you prepared to contradict that ?—A. I am. Q. In what way ?—A. Because she returned home having caught only 17 barrels. Q. I am speaking regarding the places where the fish were caught.— . A. She left her dories at Gloucester after the first voyage. They could not get 280 barrels with her dories when they were on my wharf. Q. I am asking you with reference to places where they fished. You say you can contradict Campbell's statement; how do you contradict it * —A.. I cannot contradict it from personal knowledge. Q. How can you state you believe it to be incorrect 7–A. From evi- dence I know is in existence in regard to it. - Q. To what evidence do you refer 7—A. I refer to a deposition in the hands of counsel. - Q. You are speaking in regard to some deposition in the hands of counsel, and you base your evidence on that ?—A. I do not. Q. That is the affidavit of another man; put that aside at present. From your own knowledge, can you pretend to say that Campbell's state- ment is not correct as to where he fished ?–A. I cannot believe it is true when a man says he fished in a certain place, when he says they caught one barrel here and eighty barrels there, and I know the vessel only packed out 17 barrels; I cannot believe the statement to be true. Q. It is unfortunate that the trip-book for 1860 is not here?—A. I regret it more than anything else. My little girl asked me last year for a book, and I cut the leaves out, never supposing it would be wanted. Q. Can you tell me of any other vessel in 1860 which returned from a trip in Bay Chaleurs with 17 barrels or anything like that ?—A. The schooner Annah, another of my vessels, returned from the bay with 41 barrels. - Q. What size was she 3—A. She was about 50 tons. - Q. What time of the year did she go into the bay ?—A. She went 5th July, and returned 12th September. Q. What was the highest catch made by any of your vessels that year 2—A. 336% barrels. Q. Will you explain to the Commission what this statement purports to be 3–A. A table showing the voyages of my vessels during 1860, 1861, and 1862. * - Witness handed in the following statement: Table showing the vessels engaged in the cod, halibut, and mackerel fisheries in the years 1860, 1861, and 1862. [Compiled from the books of the firm of Sinclair & Low and David W. Low, by David W. Low, September, 1877.] y-4 & ... d) e KD ſº CS U2 g e te P Halibut, and cod C º First trip macker- #. Second trip Name of vessel. ‘s fishing. From- To— ‘5 .2 i. eling. . rº, ºn mackereling. | | 2 : | 2 |3| 2 Cl) "…S ºp 3 | "as d5 º ;3| 3 d § É Ā| # # #é #| || # É ă ă # P+ | H |I|| > P- P- |T| ſt P- P- |I|| ºff P- Schr. Cynisca ... . . . . 1860|....|--|$3,730|Cod-fishing and 10 | Feb. 17 || Oct. 23 |......... $3,866 63--------------------|--|--- * = s. s : * * * * * * * * : * sº gº gº tº gº e º º gº tº gº e º 'º tº a º' - * sº º tº . * gº sº º is º gº º ºs trips trawling. - Do-------------- 1861 ....[10]. ----. Cod-fishing and Mar. 21 || Oct. 26 $2, 522 45 1,075 64 Oct. 26 to Nov. 18, 11 25; $212 04 $61 25|- - - - - - ... ... . . . . . . . . . * * * | * * * * * * = e tº trawling,7trips. 23 days, shore. Schr. C. C. Davis. --.. [1860]. -- 3, 300----do ----------- Jan. 21 July 5 ||--------. 1,633 35 July 10 to Sept. 11, ...| 54 |......... 562 08 || Sept. 12 to Oct. 13208}|......... 2 m. 1d., Gulf St.L. 13, Aim. Shore. D0-------------- 1861|....[10]. ----. Cod-fishing and Jan. 22 July 11 || 2, 218 23 985 19 July 11 to Oct. 24, 15230; 1,259 29, 427 01| Oct. 26 to Nov. 12 34% $299 75 trawling, 6trips. 3 mos. 13 d., Gulf. 28, shore. Do-------------- 1862]. --. 91. -- - - - Cod-fishing and Feb. 4 || July 11 3,877 67| 1,793 22 July 11 to Oct. 2, 15263# 2,018 57| 936 37| Oct. 3 to Oct. 18, 12||132 890 87 trawling,8trips. 2 mos. 21d., Gulf. Shore. Schr. Annah ---...--. 1860. . . . 2,000. Cod-fishing,6trips Mar. 5 || July 1 |......... 689 56 July 5 to Sept. 17, 12 41 08: 270 7: Sept. 14 to Oct. 8, 12 32%|. . . . . . . . . Georges. 2m. 7d., Gulf St.L. shore. Schr. Daniel McPhee.|1860]. -- . 1 3, 500 Cod-fishing and Mar. 17 || June 2 |.... . . . . . 1,047 76 June 13 to Sept. 12, 14 17 |. . . . . . . . . 89 52 Sept. 12 to Nov. 14|122}|... ... -- trawling, 3 trips. - 3m., Gulf of St. L. 19, Gulf. Do-------------- 1861|....[10]. - - - - - Cod-fishing and | Dec. 24 Sept. 28 3,210 16 1,409 31 Oct. 9 to Oct. 14, 13 86}| 496 56] 170 5( Oct. 14 to Nov. 13|88}| 645 18 trawling 9 mos. shore, 5 days. - 15, shore. 4 days, 8 trips. Do-------------- 1862]....[10] ...... Trawling, 6 trips. ...--...--. July 21 2,525 19 1, 155 13 July 27 to Oct. 4, 14244 2, 164 34 869 86|| Oct. 4 to Nov. 8, 14|135; 1,034 56 - Gulf, 2 mos. 7 d. shore. Schr. Ella F. Bartlett. 1860|- - - 3,600|------------------|---------|--------|---------|--------. June 1 (21) to Sept. 14207 |......... 1, 529 52| Sept. 21 to Nov. 14230}|......... * 18, Gulf, 3 m, 27 d. | 21, shore. Do. ---. --------- 1861.--.] 9.----. Cod-fishing and Mar. 4 || June 21 2, 15790. 994 96 June 21 to Sept. 30, 14275 | 1,359 72 462 57 Sept. 27 to Nov. 14|1583| 1,061 79 frawling, 4trips. 3 mos., Gulf. 13, shore. Do-------------- 1862]. --. 91....., Trawling, 7 trips. Feb. — July 8 || 2,554 77| 1, 162 06 J...". 15 º jºy. 17, 143 5 || 3, 122 44 1, 296 15|.----------------|--|- gº tº gº e = tº dº e º gº º & (82) In OS., Ürülf. - Schr. Electric Flash - 1860. 11516.-----|-----------------...--...----|---...--, ---------|--------. May 10 (29) to Nov. 16310 2, 173 05: 1,972 70 Nov. 3 to Nov. 16 65 |...... . . . 1, 5 mos., Gulf. 23, shore. D0-------------- 1861----|17|------|------------------|---------|---------|---------|--------- July 10 to Sept. 5, 17326; 1,407 75 441 82|Sept. 7to Nov. 9, 15259 | 1,471 27 , 1 mo. 25 d., Gulf. Gulf, 2 m. 1d. Do-------------- 180°----|--|------|-----------------|---------|--------------------------- June 16 to Aug. 28, 15385 1,658 75 745 50 Aug. 28 to Oct. 16366}| 2,980 11 2 mos. 12 d., Gulf. 18,6 ulf.1m. 206 - Schr. R. EI. Oakes .... [1861|- - - 4, 200------------------|---------|--------|---------|--------- May 11 to June 21, 14. 57 188 75 31 96 June 21 to Oct. 15.255 1,471 27 American shore. 26,4m.5d, Gulf. Schr. I. G. Curtis. ... [1862. 140 6, 500|------------------|---------|---------|---------|--------- 17|407; 2,975 44, 1,137 62 Oct. 13 to Nov. 15117; 892 35 Aug. 1 to Oct. 13, Gulf. 11, shore. Time fitting is included. # 2632 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. "SIĘ0Á 8 uļ Og þ9g „... |18. Ģģ, ķ，{{ 18 &ý), “3 || 8 || 88 ’8 |82, 9 ff.), ‘№lff0 I88 ‘8& ~ | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | ¡ ¿88 |9I 68L ‘I Į09 I№g ‘I *@$±3 -KoA puſē ſpumoj} -Aº Nuoqsol sťAA- ‘198LUIȚAA0U [0889A] · · · · ·* * * * |* * * * * * * * * |0ý g08 || 0 0.gg *OOT• - - - • - • • • • • - - …» «=• • • • d • • • • • • • • • • • • • •=. - - - • • *OCI• • • • • • • • • ¡ • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ‘quo5e puſe aº• -ūAo º 19Á W ºs ºse p | - - - - - - - - -|---------|------ . --|--------- Ț|0ğ 888 |68 și Iº |6Ť 88ſ & • • • • • • • • •$9 $8, 199 1903 |gę ſyſ? -0981 uſ wºulºssº.A|:::::::::|gę 9ī£ 169 ºgg'g|16 ºſſ..? -[[^ ]^^*^|&# #33.166 1333 |IV 9№ſ 3 Źſ ģ9... |]|$ 9，8% || 1933 '098ĻUI! AQUIȚ9S89 A 193 BIL ‘L | - - - - - - - - -00 983 ’8 ſýI 9ȚI '& * * * * * * * * * |L|, 0g 138 399 ‘I 160 £IA, ‘I “QUI038 pūſe 19ūAAO “I Į 8 [0 UI ĮSJøqøāI | - - - - - - - - -• • • • • • • • • ! • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • †3 g8g | * * * * * * * * * |98 ggg ºg læI OÏL, ‘I * * * * * * * * * [08 183 “I |0£ €， ºg 101 g0g ºg "spūgų [[e qĻĻAA- “1981, “000 QSQT||ſº ºſ Lş |~~~~ ~~~~" |93 006 “I lºg 98L “I *(Lºquu900GT) 698ī uſ Aºulºssº A |~~~ ~~~~~~|8g 679$ ļºſ, g， '&$|I0 ggg ºgſå }Btaj~ſ>þ> ∞ §§ | ? |#|#| || țğ | ? ? ? § 9.§ § %ſº №§ 2. № CD 3:+: F3Œ}5° E-;:£; £ e+Gò© •Q ©§. （ o ,+ e+, § 5t Syſſetu9YIHº Hºs± • H+£8,3, £ 4go º 4șj}=b << ∞©<<| 92§§ Ē9.Ê92. ?';§§º ;Ēģ *ÁĽ189Á. S[0JJ80|| I68 |‘ø88.19 AW | |#60g ºg 880 ºſ|**** SJºgºÁ 8. SI0SS9A. 8 · · · · · * * * * 8; 998 |## g!.6 ‘g |#LLI ÉLO; |-- - - - - - - -• • ► ► ► - - - - ~~~~~|~~|~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ |G# ggg |ą981|' + · · ·s!!! Ino （ſ) （I ºu qoŞ · · · · · · · · ·lgį. 981 ||ą Ilſ ‘I | lg | ggg |---------|---------|----|----~~~:::::::::-:|II sIg |1981|~~~~ sexto （HºI·Iſſos ‘QJoqs ºg I ]|9ģ.8țg...|9$ $9 $ ſſºſ...|ſig, 196 ſºğ...|90. gſ.g...|##| |#|#| 49S 9481 339||80 983'I |8981|:::::::::::::::9q • • • • • • • • • • • • •！ · · · · · 180 618 ‘g |------|#ggg |-------- • • • • • • •• • • • I • • • • I - - [ • • • • • • • •（~~~~）; «68 [1981|| ····---······-oor «= ~ ~ • • • • • • • • • •]|$ $ $ $ | 99...| }}} |II]]|[|[]|$! g6!...||098||LIŲșğlſ ºg ſººſ ºſſºs Ťſſ ºgſg |--~~~~|ggg |:::::::::|:::::[[|]]‘’’’ |398ȚIII] [99] • … - - -****|6, 190 "I løp. 698 'I |#3gI | glg |· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·|--|------ - - - - - - ~~~~|g9 069 | IggȚŤ9Ų * ， ， • • • • • • H • • • • • • • • • I - a =• • • • • ’ |#0gg | 103 || ~ ~ ~ ~• • • • H • • • • •[[|[|[]|6 496 ||0981|}}}}}}#{{{{II}{（qos • • • • • • → → →9g ºg O'I Þ8 #91 ºg ķēģī | ±±3 |~~~~ ·[II]]|[[|]]&0 &ī£ 3981] [90] • … - - - - ，--|#| |#I'I |· · · · · · · · ·|#;ſt |------|---------|---------|----|--|----------------|gš ž#g ſjší|---------------oĞİ • • • • •----|---------|---------|------| ggr |---------|---------|----|--|----------------loſ 001.099||790ųēIOWI [9ļūBCI ‘JŲ0S ’9ā0ųS '&& - - - ， ， ， ） » ! - - - • •**** |* * * * * * * * * | OLI | Iſ ſõ6 636 |* * * * * * * * *|$）8]||--| 'AON 04 S 400 |#3 991 |093|| ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° qeuuw aſſos *@JOų8 ‘LI ];$ $$$ ||9 349$.|...}， ſºgg ||gſſ gig...|'ğ']$|gț||1||39N 94 81399||8. gſg |8981] :::::::9q · · · · · · · ·|gl. 663 |6g 6gą “Iş}}}g #ggg |---------|---------|----|--|----------::::::|g6 36 |1981OCI ’9JOĻs “Uuſ 'ſg|- • • • • • • • • • t • • • • • • • • • t • •* * * * * * * |#[0g | ſg |0g 318 ‘Iſſº * * * * * * * *|$&63||--| 'AoN 04 gi 'qøO |79 988 “Işļ099]] - ~~~~ sȚA BOI "O "O ‘JUſos 68 9€I ‘L Þ0 gizş | - - - - - - - -|\gg |------|-----w • • • W • • • • •----|----|--|----------------|--------- liggj|---------------oct 89998 'E$• • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • i - - - - - „ ! » • • • • • I • • • • •--• • • • I • • • • • • • • • t • • • + → • § • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • • • • • • • •-098Ț----- - - - gospūÁO （IqoŞ H} ----,---- 3.!}§ 1, „ ș| 3 | $ | ff || ? |#|$ | 3 ģğ | _ ， | ... Ë, ĒžĚ| 3 §: || É5 | g, |?-$ | :: ！ $9§ 4e>& E | ±± E►�º | ~ || ..→ Q EÈÈ.§ 3 | P | E | ā Ēź3ųțIęIºx{oſguu%“[9$$0A Į0 0ūIEN ĢĒ Ě Ē | Ģğ | # #| ?Ę | #đ!！! paſūL . | # § §* º | § ğ | ță | ğŠ Þº ? .É.Qğ.5 | ·�• . •Ķ©•§§g };5Ë; || È Ě Ě{ "Pºnuſºtroſ)--898.I pup ‘I9SI ‘098I savºſi 0\\ u\ 80449\s\',0,199|opų pup ºnqºqoq ‘poo 9ų ug pa6p6u0 sqøssøn aqq fiuyºnoqs aqqw¤L AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2633 Q. When was it prepared ?–A. It was prepared before I left home. Q. What was the tonnage of the Daniel McPhee ?—A. About 60 tons, I think. Q. You prepared this statement yourself?—A. Yes. Q. From your own books?--A. Yes. Q. Will you read the column of catches in which the 17 barrels ap- peared ?–A. 54, 230g, 2634, 41, 17, 864, 244, 207, 275, 325, 310, 326%, 385, 57. They are shore and gulf mixed. - * Q. Will you take out the shore ?—A. 57,864. Q. The catches on your shore appear to be small compared with the others ?—A. The 864 barrels were caught in five days off our shores. Q. But the small catches appear to have been taken on your Shore ; the 300-barrel catches you have read were taken in the bay ?—A. Not all of them. - Q. I asked you to read those which were caught on your shores; you did read them; were not the 300-barrel catches taken in the bay ?–A. Yes; those were caught in the gulf. Q. Don't you think it is more probable that, as your trip-book is lost, which would be conclusive evidence on that point, you are mistaken as to 17 barrels having been caught in the gulf on that trip, because Camp- bell's name does not appear on the list of the men who were in the Ves- sel when 17 barrels were taken 2–A. No ; I am positive he was not in the vessel in the gulf that trip. Q. Could he have deliberately coined the statement that he was in the gulf and took that number of barrels 2 His name does not appear in the list of the crew when the 17 barrels were taken 3–A. It does not appear in the list. Q. You explained toward the close of your examination the right of fishermen to take their fish and sell them elsewhere; when a vessel re. turns to Gloucester, does not the merchant, when the fish are landed, pack them?—A. Yes. Q. That is a matter with which the fishermen, as fishermen, have nothing to do 2–A. Nothing to do with packing out. \, Q. Therefore, if he were allowed to take his fish, he would have to pay the merchant the packing charges 3–A. Yes. Q. They would amount to $2 a barrel ?—A. That was the cost in cer- tain years; it is now $1.75. - Q. So that practically it is never done 2—A. No. Q. It is also well understood that the merchant will have a lien on the fish caught for any advances made the fishermen 3–A. Yes. Q. The practical working of the system is that the fisherman does § take his fish elsewhere ?–A. I don’t know of any case where they 101. Q. One of the witnesses from Gloucester stated here that it was the Custom for the ship-merchants to agree among themselves as to the price they will allow the fishermen for the fish when they pack out. Is that correct?—A. Not to my knowledge. Q. How do the merchants arrange 2 Does one pay $10, another $11, and another $13, and are different prices paid to fishermen for their fish at the same port 2—A. For mackerel ? Q. Yes.—A. No ; because trips are hardly ever sold at the same prices three days running. Q. I am speaking with regard to the price the merchant allows the fishermen; whether the merchants agree among themselves to allow so much 3—A. The crew get the price at which the whole trip is sold. 2634 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. But the whole trip of mackerel may be held over for a year, sales depending on the market?—A. The crew would hold over with him. Q. Do you mean to say that, if a crew came in in October, they would not be paid when the packing out took place"—A. No. Q. They might hold over till next spring 2—A. If there is not a mar- ket for the fish the fish cannot be sold, so the crew cannot be settled with, and the cargo remains on the wharf till it is sold. Q. Don’t they agree on a price'? Does not the merchant buy the fish from the men 7–A. Sometimes they will settle in that way, and the merchant will take them at a price. Q. Did you ever know a case where a cargo has remained on a wharf all winter waiting for a rise in price?—A. I do; I had several vessels in 1860, the trips of which I kept over. - - Q. And did not pay the men 2–A. Not all of them ; some of them kept their fish in store, and I did not settle with them. Q. How many of them did so 3–A. I could not tell. Q. Is it the general and invariable rule 3–A. That was an exceptional year. The usual rule is to settle the trips as soon as possible after they a TTLVG, . * . Q. When they do settle, how do they arrive at the price; do the merchants agree on a price º–A. Nothing of the kind. Q. It is so with regard to codfish ; it has been so testified here—that the merchants agree on a certain price they will allow their fishermen for green fish 7—A. Yes. . Q. That is the rule with regard to codfish 2–A. I cannot say it is the rule. They may do it; I don’t know. I notice in Mr. Steele's book va- riations in price. * Q. I know they pay different prices in different years. Suppose 89 vessels arrived to-day in Gloucester and packed out and paid the men, and the vessels were owned by eight or nine different persons, would the men be paid different prices 2—A. They would be; that, is if the 89 trips sold for different prices. If all arrived on one day, they would be all settled with at the price of mackerel that day. r Q. Suppose the mackerel were not sold that day 3–A. He settles at the market-price. - Q. At a sum they agree upon 7–A. Yes. There is always a market- price for mackerel, well understood. Q. There is a market-price well understood at which the merchant pays the crews?—A. You misunderstand it. Let me explain it. In Gloucester there is great competition for trips of mackerel, and four or five buyers come down as soon as a trip is in, after the trip of mackerel. They will bid for the trip, and the one that bids highest takes it at that price. That is the usual way of selling mackerel at Gloucester. If the fitter and owner wants the mackerel himself to send to his customers, he says he will take them himself at the highest bid. Q. IS it offered at auction ?—A. It is offered among the buyers, Sometimes there is great competition among them. Q. Take such a firm as George Steele. When one of their vessels comes in, would they sell the fish to the buyers ?—A. Yes. - Q. Does he not pack himself?—A. Yes, he always packs. Q. He would not sell the fish until they were packed 7–A. No. Some- times he sells them as soon as they arrive. He says, “I will sell this trip for so much after they are packed out.” * Q. What is his practice; is it to sell to the buyers, or to pack it, pur- chase it, and sell it himself?—A. To sell it to the buyers. Q. There is a class of men known specially as buyers?—A. Yes. j AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2635 Q. Is not Mr. Steele what you call a fish-merchant 2—A. He is not a fish-buyer. - d Q. Does he sell his own fish. that his vessels have caught 7–A. He O€S. Q. Upon the question of insurance, you explained that the insurers Would not be liable below a certain percentage. I did not understand Whether you knew what the percentage was.-A. I do not. I believe it to be 12 per cent. Q. I want to know positively. Do you wish that to go in your evi- dence as your statement that it is 12 per cent. 3—A. Not that it is, but that I believe it to be so from hearsay. * f Q. Does it differ from ordinary policies”—A. Yes, our risks are dif- erent. Q. Do you know that your policies differ from ordinary policies about the percentage—about the percentage below which the insurer will not be liable %–A. I do not know that they differ. t Q. I understand that you don’t wish to make a positive statement on that point %–A. I don’t wish to make a positive statement on anything I don’t understand, * Q. Do you know the percentage below which ordinary companies don’t pay—is it 5 per cent. ?—A. I don’t know. Q. In answer to Mr. Dana, you made what struck me as a curious Statement—that to raise money on mortgage on a vessel you had to pay a very high rate of interest ?—A. A higher rate than on real estate. Q. What interest would you have to pay ?—A. I know a mortgage on a vessel would bring 8 per cent. Q. That applies to all vessels, does it not ?—A. Yes. Q. Not specially to fishing-vessels 7–A.. I am talking about fishing- Vessels. V * Q. With regard to other vessels, engaged in general trade, what Would be the rate of interest at which you could raise money on them?— A. I don’t know. - Q. For you know anything it may be the same as on fishing-vessels. Do you know or not that it is higher on general trading-vessels than on fishing-vessels?—A. No. Q. In point of fact you don’t know anything about it 2—A. No. Q. You don’t know from practical knowledge that it is 8 per cent. on fishing-vessels 3—A. No. Q. Your information on that is not such as will enable you to give evidence under oath 2–A. It is not positive. - Q. You spoke in regard to the depreciation of those fishing-vessels, and I understood your evidence to relate to all shipping?—A. To fishing- Vessels generally. w Q. The same remarks you made with regard to the depreciation of fishing-vessels are applicable to all shipping?—A. I don’t think so. Q: Why not?—A. Because the wear and tear on fishing-vessels is more than on any other class of vessels. - Q. I will limit the question to a vessel employed in the Gulf of St. Lawrence during the months when the fishery is prosecuted there—June, July, August, September, and October. Will the wear and tear of a fishing-Vessel in the gulf during those months be more than the wear and tear of a trading-vessel?—A. I should say it was. Q. Give me your reason.—A. The Gulf of St. Lawrence in the fall is a Very rough place. Q. You will remember that the fishing months I gave you were from 2636 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. June to November, not including November?—A. The greatest loss of fishing vessels in the gulf was in August. Q. The depreciation on a vessel engaged in fishing in the gulf during those months is as great or greater than that of a vessel engaged in ordinary trade?—A.. I think so. & Q. Can you give me your reason?—A. The reason is that the vessel is engaged in the fishing business and is on a dangerous route. Q. You think the gulf is dangerous?—A. I do. Q. What has the danger of the gulf to do with the wear and tear of vessels?—A. The wear and tear of a vessel comprises injuries she may receive in a gale or by being stranded. Q. The stranding would perhaps come in another valuation. The in- surers would most likely have to pay for that ?—A. Perhaps so and perhaps not. - Q. Don’t you think they would 7–A. According to what the loss would be. The insurance is 4 per cent. for four months. Why should the rate of insurance be so high if there was no danger of wear and tear to the vessel ? º, Q. I don’t know. Do they insure the vessels for the season or for trips?—A. For the trips. That is what they charge—4 per cent. in the gulf, One per cent. per month. Q. What is the insurance of a vessel going to George's Bank 3–A.. I don’t know. -> Q. You were posted yourself in regard to it?—A. I never posted my- self on that point. Q. Take vessels fishing off your own coast. With regard to wear and tear, don’t you think the wear and tear of vessels fishing off your own coast would be more than that of vessels fishing in the gulf during the months they fish there 7–A. I do not. Q. Not in the winter season 3–A. We fish on our shores all the year round. t Q. Is not the wear and tear greater on your coast than in the gulf during the summer months when they fish there 2–A. I should say it W2.S. Q. You spoke of the profits made out of fish, after they had been landed, by the fish merchants. Will you explain what the profits are?— A. On mackerel all the profits are in the packing. - Q. And how much per barrel profit is there on that ?–A. From thirty cents to fifty cents. Q. A little higher than that, is it not ?—A. No ; I don’t think it is. Q. Have you ever packed yourself 3–A. Yes. Q. Much 3—A. I packed during three years. Q. So you are able to tell about packing.—A. Packing was then done at $1.15 per barrel. Now it is $1.75. • Q. Did it pay at $1.15%—A. Yes; barrels then were very much lower. Q. But it left a profit then 3–A. Yes. *: Q. Have barrels risen in proportion to the rise in the charge for pack- ing 2—A. Yes. Q. The same proportion ?—A. About the same proportion, I think. Q. Then, do I understand that the increased cost of packing is solely due to the increased cost of barrels 2 Is there not a larger profit made on packing 2—A. I don’t know but what they may make a larger profit. Prices went up during the war, and they remained so till, I think, last year, when they dropped. Q. In what other ways have the merchants got profits upon pro- visions furnished to the families of fishermen 2–A. To the vessels. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2637 Q. Have you thought over since yesterday the question that was asked you, as to the profits they charge on supplies furnished to the families of the fishermen 3–A. I have not given it a thought since yes- terday. - g Q. Perhaps you did not give it much thought before yesterday ?—A. I only gave it from my knowledge of the business. Q. What would you be prepared to say to-day is the profit they make on supplies furnished to the families of fishermen 7–A. About ten per Cent. Q. Not more than that ?—A. It would not be over that. Q. ...” know that sometimes they lose the supplies 3–A. I know they do. Q. And don’t they make sufficient profit to cover all that ?—A. I don’t think they do. Q. You think they are not shrewd enough men to make the charge Sufficient to insure them against loss %–A. They might. Q. You don’t know exactly. Have you examined, their books and prices so as to be enabled to testify accurately ont hat point 2—A. No; I have not. - * Q. You volunteer what you assume is correct 2—A. I give it from my recollection of my business in 1861 and 1862. Q. I understand they agree with wholesale dealers, to have the goods furnished at wholesale prices, and the fishermen are charged the retail prices'—A. Yes. Q. The difference between the wholesale price and retail price you don't know 7–A. I don’t know. - Q. The difference is the profit which the merchant makes 2—A. Yes, and takes the risk. Q. You were town clerk of Gloucester for some time, and are ac- Quainted, of course, with the valuations, more or less, of the different merchants 3–A. Yes. Q. You spoke of two or three names as being leading men 7–A. Yes. Q. What are those men assessed at 3–A. I could not tell ; I don’t recollect. As town clerk I would not know. Q. You seem to have filled numerous offices, and, no doubt, filled them efficiently 7—A. The assessors assess for taxes and keep their own books. Q. From the knowledge you have gained in looking over the assess- ors’ book, cannot you state what a man like Mr. Leighton is taxed for 2– A. I guess he is taxed at Q. Take Mr. Leighton’s firm.—A. I suppose it is assessed at $30,000. Q. What is that on ?—A. That is on the valuation of his real estate and vessels. - ſº Q. How does that compare with its value 2—A. In Gloucester they tax at a little over three-fourths of the value, Q. Of its cash value or ordinary market value 3—A. Of the ordinary market value, as it is considered. If you force such a property as Mr. Leighton's to a sale, it would not bring anything like its Value. Q. What other leading men did you mention ?—A. Dennis & Ayer. Q. About what would be their valuation ?—A. I don’t know. Q. Take Mr. Steele; what would his firm be taxed at 2—A. Mr. Steele is probably taxed at $20,000. Q. Would you put the four leading men in Gloucester down as worth from $20,000 to $30,000 each º–A. I don’t think anybody in the fishing business in Gloucester is worth over $30,000. * Q. What are they assessed at 2—A. I don’t know. I have not seen 2638 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. the assessors' books for a good many years; I cannot tell. I have formed my judgment from what I think they are worth. Q. How many vessels is Mr. Steele running 2—A. On an average, nine Vessels. - - Q. They would range from what price 2—A. They would average $5,000 each. - Q. What is his real estate worth 2–A. About $10,000. Q. What are the premises where he lives worth, another $10,000?— A. I should think his house is worth $5,000; perhaps that is a little high. Q. Those amounts would reach $60,000; you told me he is put down as being assessed at $20,000?—A. That may be. - Q. Why have you stated that you believed him to be assessed at about $20,000 ?—A. I have stated his valuation, perhaps, high. . . Q. Do you think there could be that difference between you and the assessors 3–A. There might be. * Q. Do you really think you could be, or the assessors could be, so far in error?—A. I should think George Steele is worth about $35,000. Q. You mean after paying all his debts 2—A. I don’t know what his debts are. Q. You mean after paying his debts?—A. I mean the face value of his property is $35,000. I don’t know what his debts may be. . Q. How do you reconcile the statements.?—A. I probably set a high value on his vessel property and other property. - Q. You have already put in the vessels at a valuation of $5,000 each under the statement you made under oath yesterday.—A. I know he had some very expensive vessels. Q. When you were making a statement of Mr. Steele's business, show- ing how much he had lost or gained, you put down the vessels as Worth $5,000 each 2—A. I did so. That is what I took as an average, because some cost $8,000 and some less. Q. And in order to show what he gained or lost, you charged inter- est at 5 per cent. On that amount º–A. Yes. Q. Now, you may be all astray about the valuation?—A. No; I don’t say I am all astray. You asked me for the assessor's valuation, and I could not give it, and I answered from my judgment. Q. How do you reconcile the statements 3–A. I can reconcile it in this way: If Mr. Steele's property was sold to-day it would not bring more than $35,000; that is the face value of it. Q. That is, if forced into the market to-day ?—A. Yes; it would not bring more than $35,000. $ Q. Don't you know that if a large quantity of any kind of property, not fishing property alone, is forced into the market the price is sure to fall 3–A. You want anything of that kind set at a cash value, don’t you ? Q. Suppose you force a lot of stock on the market, more than the pub- lic want, will it not necessarily run the price down 3–A. It would run low. Q. I am not talking about forced sales, but of the assessed value, as sworn to by the assessors, and as you as a practical man would value it. How do you reconcile the discrepancy between your statement of yester- day, when you placed each vessel at $5,000, and that statement that you do not believe the face value of Mr. Steele's property, irrespective of what he owns, is worth more than $20,000 or $30,000?—A. I took the aver- age of vessels for 19 years. I did not take them at what they are Worth to-day. Q. I think you did. I think you allowed a large sum for depreciation. AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2639 & - When you were making up the statement to show the fishing business, you took insurance 107 vessels, $535,000, that is $5,000 each vessel ?— A. Yes. . g Q. You charge insurance on those vessels at that rate, $21,000 ?—A. That is what he probably paid. $ Q. You then charged against the earnings of the vessels the interest on that capital sum, $535,000 at 7 per cent 7–A. Yes. ar Q. You then charged taxes on $160,000?—A. One hundred and sixty thousand dollars for seventeen years. Q. And then you charged depreciation on the vessels, $29,000 %–A. Yes. - * * - Q. So if you charge depreciation and interest you keep up the capital stock to where it originally was ?—A. The depreciation is wear and tear to a large extent, and what are expenses of the vessel—sails and rigging, painting and repairing. Q. I recall, your attention to the fact that I asked you what was the depreciation of a vessel in one year, and you gave $1,200%—A. Yes. Q. I ask you what would be the depreciation yearly for the next five years?—A. Probably not more than $800. Q. You gave your estimate yesterday of Mr. Steele's worth and the value of his vessels—are you inclined to-day to withdraw it 2–A. No, I hold to it. Q. If you take off one-half of the principal the interest would be reduced one-half 7–A. The value of the vessels would be $45,000–9 vessels averaging $5,000 each; and if the wharf was sold I think that it would bring $8,000, a fair valuation in my opinion. Q. Did you not just now state that this wharf was worth $10,000?— A. I know I did ; but his wharf is, together with another part, divided in the middle, and this would not make it so valuable as other wharf property. * . - - Q. You change this valuation, then, from $10,000 to $8,000 7–A. I should think that $8,000 would be a fair valuation, and then I should Set down the house at $4,000. Q. You are coming down on that valuation very much 3–A. I said $5,000, but if it was put up at auction it would not bring that much. Q. Does he own any other property besides the 9 vessels, the wharf, and the house?—A. That is all the property it shows on the face. Q. Does he own stock of any kind?—A. I do not know. Q. Has he no capital invested ?–A. I do not know, but I presume that he owns ten shares in the Gloucester Bank. He is one of the directors, and he must have ten shares to qualify himself for being a director. • *, - - Q. I ask you frankly what do you believe; has he or has he not money invested in other public works in Gloucester ?–D. I do not think so. I hardly think that he has. - Q. Does he own goods or anything else?—A. Eſe has goods in his Store, but Our Outfitters do not keep a large stock of goods in stock. Q. What valuation would you put on this stock 7–A. I should think that $1,500 would cover the value of the stock which he keeps on hand. Q. Will you include the shares in your estimate %–A. I will do so. Q. What would you put it at on the whole 2–A. $45,000. Q. How do you make that out 2—A. Five times nine make $45,000. I * it $60,000, and three-quarters of it makes $45,000 as the cash V8, U16, . Q. Then this account which you have made up is not put down at the Cash or real value, but at a fancy value 3–A. It is put down at the 2640 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. average value of his vessels, taken for the time that they have been running. - - Q. What right had you to charge interest and insurance on this prop- erty at an amount largely disproportionate to the real value? Don’t you see that you reduce the profits immensely by that mode of proceed- ing 3–A. That is the face value of the property; if he pays interest on more than he ought to, that is his loss. - Q. But you don’t pretend to say that he is paying the interest you made up in this sum; this is your estimate 3—A. Well, it is an estimate based on the original cost of the vessels, and the average cost. Q. I will ask you frankly if you knew what his vessels were worth, and what you ought to put down there 2 Is it fair to make up the sum and charge interest on $535,000%—A. I think so, because I have charged nothing for losses. Q. I beg your pardon ; this does not allow the possibility of risk. You have insured the capital invested, charged interest at the rate of 7 per cent. On that capital, allowed 14% per cent. for depreciation of ves. Sels, and charged insurance upon the charter and outfits, and it is a dead certainty º–A. That is true; insurance is charged on the charter. Q. There is a dead certainty and no possibility of risk?—A. That is true, as the statement goes; yes. `i; Q. Do you think that is fair, when he is running no risk, to ask him to pay insurance on the value of the property far beyond what it is Worth & In that way you reduce the profits down to nothing 2—A. Yes. Q. Suppose you readjust that sum, and make up the sum on the real Value of these things, and charge interest on the reai value of the ves- Sels, and insurance and taxes on real value?—A. I should then have to charge more for depreciation. Q. Are you aware what percentage you charged for depreciation ?—A. I did not charge so much as it would be. Q. Are you aware what percentage you charged in this account 7–A. No ; I did not reckon any percentage. Q. It seems to me to look like 14; per cent., at least 2—A. For depre- ciation ? Well. Q. Do you think that 14% per cent. is a large sum, or not, to allow for depreciation ?—A. I do not think that it is a large sum. Q. Why?—A. Because it is very expensive running a vessel. Q. But running -a vessel has nothing to do with depreciation ?--A. Why not. - Q. Explain how it is. I cannot conceive of the connection ?—A. The Wear and tear of the vessel is an expense, and it costs something to keep her in repair and running order. - Q. That is for repairs 7–A. Well, that is part of the depreciation ac- Count. Can you find repairs there anywhere? Q. Part of it is depreciation account. It embraces both the actual repairs and the actual depreciation which arises from the vessel getting older 3–A. That is it. Q. You stated that the $800 is the amount of depreciation after the first year for the following five years; do you still adhere to that ?–A. Yes; that would be about right, I should think. If anything it would be more, because Procter's vessel shows about $1,200 or $1,400 expense in this regard. ^ - - \ Q. That is in the statement which you have put in to-day ?–A. Yes. Q. I see in it that $79 is charged for tinware and $48 for anchor lost, but is that an ordinary expense 2 It is an extraordinary loss % It does not often happen?—A. I have known vessels lose two anchors a year. AwarD CF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2641 Q. I dare say, but is it ordinary wear and tear?—A. Why not ? It is part of the depreciation. Q. Is it an ordinary loss % Is it fair to charge the loss of an anchor which occurs during one year, as a general charge against a vessel for the year's depreciation ?—A. No. Q. You have done it here.—A. How % Q. In this very statement, in which you make an expenditure of $1,823.−A. I did not call it $1,800, but about $1,200 or $1,400 for that vessel. g Q. I find it marked down here as $1,823?—A. Yes. tº Q. And you think it would be about $1,400?—A. You misunderstand me about this; insurance is set down at $539, and then there.is another item. * Q. Commission for skipper ?– A. How large is that ? Q. $465.—A. And then there is the cost of tinware. Q. But that is too large an amount for an ordinary charge. You do not supply $7.9 worth of tinware every year or the tenth of it 3—A. O, yeS. Q. Every year 7–A. Yes. - Q. How much would you take off from this item 7—A. An owner would consider himself fortunate if an offer was made him to supply his vessel with tinware for $10 a year. - ~ Q. How much will you take off from the $79%—A. $60. Q. And how much from the lost-anchor item 3–A. Not a cent. Q. You charge that every year as a part of the expenses?—A. Yes; I guess that Steele's expenses average an anchor every year. Q. Then there are railway fees?—A. Yes; but that I don’t take off. Q. You consider that a yearly expense 3—A. Yes. By Mr. Foster: . Q. Explain what this is for.—A. It is for the marine railway for re- pairs. & By Mr. Davies: - Q. You put down $63 for lumber for ice-house; is that required every year?—A. Yes; more or less. Q. Do you build new ice-houses every year?—A. No, not new ; but some expenditure is required in this relation yearly. Q. What do you think would be a fair allowance for that ?—A. About one-half; I will take $35 off from that item. Q. What do you do with ballast; does it remain in the vessel ?—A. No; it is taken out. g Q. Is this ballast expense incurred every year?—A. No ; not the whole of it. Q. The sum of $80 is put down here for it?—A. Yes. I should say that about $40 a year would be a fair estimate for ballast. Q. Is a new swivel gun required every year 3–A. No. Q. In fact, this is not a depreciation account; it does not show the items for depreciation and wear and tear?—A. Items are there for what a charterer of a vessel would have to furnish. By Mr. Foster: • ; Q. But he would not supply a swivel-gun ?—A. Probably not. By Mr. Davies: - Q. The cost of ballast would never be charged for depreciation on the wear and tear of a vessel ?—A. I do not think so. It would be charged in the vessel’s expense account. - 166 F 2642 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q There is a great difference between that and this account; include these items in making up the sum total, and then tell us what percent- age you charge for depreciation and wear and tear?—A. Those charges form part of the depreciation account. Q. Do you really think that expenditure for ballast and a swivel-gun form part of the depreciation account 2 Do you honestly think so, major ?—A. As to the swivel-gun, you can throw that out ; it is an ex- ception to the general rule, because there are not many vessels which Carry Such guns ; but all those expenses, added to the depreciation of the hull of the vessel, go to make up that depreciation account. Q. In making up this account you have included these items as part of it 3–A. Yes. } Q. Even taking that method of making up and charging depreciation, let me ask you to look at the return before you, showing as net earnings for each schooner $251 ?—A. Yes. Aºat would be for four and one-half months, half of the season 3– . Y. 62.S. Q. That would be $500 for the season; this is for half of the season, and of course it would be the same for the other half of the season, if they were then employed 3—A. Yes. ** Q. Multiply that by 107, the number of vessels mentioned in the sum º–A. Yes. r Q. What is the result 2–A. Fifty-three thousand seven hundred and fourteen dollars. Q. That is not a bad profit for a man to make 2–A. No. Q. What percentage would that give on the capital employed 3–A. You don’t look above and see how the charterer stands. Q. I will come to that directly. What percentage would $53,714 form on the capital invested; $535,000 %–A. It would be a little short of 10 per cent. . Q. This is supposing that the owner of these 107 vessels would have run them without a shadow of risk, paying insurance upon them and receiving interest at the rate of 17 per cent—7 per cent. on his capital being already included—paying taxes out of his profits, and having an allowance of 143 per cent. depreciation. If that is so, will you kindly explain what you meant by telling Mr. Dana that a person who invested his money in vessels and who did not bring skilled labor to bear upon his operations could not make money 3–A. I did so for the very reason that George Steele's vessels are the most successful vessels in Gloucester. Q. But this is only a supposed state of things. What did you mean by making that answer to Mr. Dana 3—A. That is a well-known fact. Q. Unfortunately the facts and your evidence do not agree, I am afraid. You have proved here pretty conclusively that a man who invests $535,000 on these vessels, employed in business, should make 17% per cent. On his money after paying taxes, insurance, and keeping him- self perfectly safe. How do you reconcile that result with the state- ment you made to Mr. Dana, that a person who invests his money in this business would be sure to lose 3—A. You do not take into account the loss, but you take it as being all profit. Q. The owner would suffer no loss, though the charterer would. It seems singular, does it not ? You Say this is where a man charters a Vessel ?—A. Yes. Q. In the first place, is George Steele a charterer of vessels º–A. No. Q. Then this statement, which assumes to relate to George Steele's business, as his name is mentioned as the charterer of the vessel, does not represent an existing state of facts, but is merely a theory which AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2643 you put forth 3–A: I supposed I had mentioned on the account that it was an estimate. º Q. That is the real fact, is it not ?—A. Yes. The real fact is that I made a mere estimate in this regard. Q. George Steele does not charter vessels but owns them 2–A. Yes. Q. And this statement supposes him to be a charterer 7—A. Yes. Q. Though he is not one º–A. Yes. Q. Have you had the opportunity of examining George Steele's books? —A. I have not. - Q. How did you get these thirteen or fourteen trips ?—A. I saw the trip-books. I asked Mr. Steele for permission to show them to the Commission. - Q. You then had the opportunity of examining his books?—A. Yes, as to his trip-books, but not as to his ledger. * Q. Did you ask for his ledger ?—A.. I did not. Q. I suppose if you had done so you would have obtained access to it 3–A. Probably I should. * Q. Therefore you do not know what his books show as to actual profit and loss sustained by him during this period º–A. I do not. Q. And the actual state of facts may be at variance with the theory you advance %–A. I hardly think so. Q. Supposing that George Steele stands in the position you assume in this statement, he would be bankrupt beyond all redemption ?—A. Yes. Q. You have proved him from theory to be bankrupt beyond all re- demption, when in fact he is a capitalist worth $45,000, which exhibits the difference between the practical statement and the theory?—A. Yes; but he had capital when he went into the business. Q. Do you state that he brought it in with him 3–A. One-half of it was made in the sail-making business. - - Q. Where was the other half made 3–A. In the fishing business dur- ing nineteen years, but that is only $1,000 a year, and he ought to make that. A. The actual loss on each vessel, for 107 vessels, you place at $167?— A. Yes. Q. Will you make that up and tell me for how much he ought to be a defaulter ?—A. His loss would be $17,869. Q. And that is not consistent with the facts; he is not a defaulter to that amount.—A. He has made it up in other parts of his business, but as far as his vessels are concerned he has probably lost that sum. Q. You did not get access to his profit and loss ledger ?—A. No. Q. That would show exactly how it is, and this is an imaginary con- clusion ?—A. Yes. I could not make it up without the actual bills of expenses for his vessels. I thought it was already understood that this Was imaginary. i Q. Turning to the credit side of that account, the catch is 33,645 bar- rels of mackerel ?—A. Yes. - - Q. Will you tell me where you got the values?—A. From the trip- book. - Q. And that shows the values at which he settled with his men 7– A. Yes. is Q. Does it show the actual cash price which he received for these 33,645 barrels 3—A, Yes. * Q. Will you explain 3–A, Remember that this is for the fish and the packing, which he receives when he sells the trip. Q. Does that trip on its face show the actual moneys which he received 2644 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. for the barrels of fish and to whom they were sold 7–A. It shows it with the packing out. g Q. Will you turn up one of the trips and explain your meaning 2—A. Here is a trip made between August and October in the schooner Marathon. Q. It is a settlement between Mr. Steele and his crew 7–A. Yes; and the settlement between Mr. Steele and his vessel for that trip. Q. Does it show to whom the mackerel were sold 3–A. No. Q. Does it show the price per barrel for which they were sold 7––A. . Yes; the packing out. The prices were $16, $12, and $6. Q. Are not these the prices at which he settled with his men 7––A. Certainly, and the prices at which he sold the fish. Q. Are you prepared to state that he never sold any of those fish for any higher price than that which he allowed his men 3––A. I would not SWear to that, because I do not know. y Q. You do not know whether this was the case or not ?——A. I will Swear in this respect with regard to my own vessels. Q. Are you prepared to state that Mr. Steele did not realize a larger price for the mackerel than that at which he settled with his crew 2––A. I do not actually know whether this was the case or not, but I do know that it is the custom in Gloucester for the merchants to settle with their crews at the exact prices for which they sell their fish. They do not settle with the crews for less than they get. Q. Did not you tell me, major, that it was the invariable practice for the merchants to settle with their crews when the vessels packed off, and that on a rise taking place in the market the former got the benefit of it?—A, O, that is a different thing. If the merchant buys the mack- erel of the crew and keeps the fish on hand for a rise, and obtains it, that is his profit. Q. So that the profit which Steele may have made with these 33,645 barrels of mackerel is a profit of which you absolutely know nothing 3– A. I know nothing about that. Q. So this statement does not pretend to be an exhibit of the actual profit which Steele may have made in this relation ?—A. No ; but I know the custom of the city, and that is to sell the trip and to allow the men the price then received. Q. I merely want to show that the course of business is such that an experienced man can take advantage of a rise in the market and make a handsome profit of it?—A. That is true; and on the other hand he may lose. t - Q. At what rate per barrel do you credit these mackerel ?—A. The average price, as I stated in my explanation of the summary, is $12 per barrel for the 17 years during which he had vessels in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence. That is the price which he actually received for his mackerel. e - By Sir Alexander Galt: Q. Does that cover all descriptions of mackerel ?—A. Yes, all descrip- tions that are packed from his vessel. Q. And the average was as high as $122—A. Yes. Q. That was the actual result 3–A. Yes. Q. That is without packing, of course 3—A. Yes. By Mr. Foster: * Q. Do you mean to say that Mr. Steele's mackerel during 17 years averaged $12 a barrel, without packing-charges 3—A. Yes; Mr. Steele was very successful in his trips. - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2645 Q. He took a large quantity of mackerel when currency prices Were extremely high 2–A. When the price was low he sent his vessels cod- fishing, and when they were high he sent them to the gulf. Mr. Davies: Q. I find that the average actual receipt of Mr. Noble, who has been examined here for the three qualities of mackerel, were $15.34, so that really you are a little below what I thought the price would be. These are Currency values, I suppose ?—A. Yes. * Q. You charge against these catches of 17 years for bait, &c., $48,052.80%—A. Yes. Q. Dividing that sum by 107 leaves $450 for each vessel?—A. Yes. Q. I notice that in a statement concerning an actual trip you put the actual stock charges down at $4.15%—A. Yes. Q. Showing a difference of thirty-five dollars between these items in these two statements?—A. That may be so. - Q. Why did you not charge this item as $415, as was the case with the Pharsalia, concerning which the sample statement was put in here ? —A. Of course I took the actual sum which was expended for stock Charges. - Q. Then this expenditure for the Pharsalia was a little below the ordi- nary run ?–A. Yes; it is below the average. - Q. And this item represents the actual expenditure taken from the books º–A. Yes. - - Q. Are the items for outfits and expenses put down also from actual expenditures?—A. No ; they are estimates. Q. They are suppositious?—A. They are estimates; yes. Q. You have already gone over the provisions to show that the item of 40 cents a day in this regard was correct ; that had reference to the halibut fishery 3–A. All other fisheries average the same. Q. You think so 7–A. Yes. Q. At what figure do you estimate the percentage of profit which is made by the merchant who furnishes the supplies 3––A. I guess that it is in the neighborhood of 10 per cent. - Q. Would you say that it is above ten per cent.”—A. No ; I think it Would average about ten per cent. Q. Then on $85,386 spent for provisions a profit of about $8,530 would be made 3—A. Yes. Q. You charge $1 a barrel for salt 3––A. Yes; that is the usual charge. Q. Are there only two barrels in a hogshead of salt”—A. There are Seven and a half bushels, or two barrels in it. Q. Surely there must be more ?—A. There are seven and a half bush- els in two barrels of salt. - Q. Do not two and a half bushels make a barrel of salt?—A. No ; there are three and a half bushels to the barrel. Q. Would you not say that there are 5 barrels to the hogshead º–A. No, I could not say that. Q. What would you put it at 3–A. 2.27 fish-barrels. Q. What does it cost a hogshead 7–A. $2. Q. You charge $8,500 for salt, for as many barrels at $1 a barrel; one-half of it would be profit, and that would leave $4,250 as profit 3– —A. Yes. * Y Q. You set down 107 bait-mills, one for each vessel, for the voyage 3– . 62S, Q. Do you mean to tell us that a vessel requires a new bait-mill on eVery Voyage she makes 3–A. No. 2646 n AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Would you reduce this item one-half º–A. I would reduce it one- Quarter. - - Q. Would not one bait-mill last two trips ?—A. Yes; it would last for 4 months and 13 days. - t ". Q. Would one last for 2 different trips ?—A. These mills wear out as to the teeth in one season, and these have to be renewed for the next trip. The Wood-work of the mill will last for 2 seasons. Q. Then you charge the value of a new bait-mill for each season's trip, and that is too much 3—A. Yes; it should be #. As to salt, I may here mention that 50 hogsheads of salt will fill 115 barrels; these hogs- heads contain about 3 barrels. - By Mr. Dana : Q. How many bushels are reckoned to a hogshead of salt at the cus- tom-house 3—A. 8. f By Mr. Davies: - Q. Do you mean to say that salt costs, wholesale, $2 a hogshead 7– A. I know that is the price charged for it. ." Q. What does it cost, say, by the 100 or 1,000 hogsheads' Does a merchant for such a quantity pay $2 a hogshead º–A. No, probably not ; he would probably obtain it for $1.75 or $1.87% per hogshead. Y Q. Showing a difference of about 25 cents per hogshead as profit 3–A. ..Y. eS. Q. Would not the profit be more than 25 cents per hogshead on 8,500 barrels of salt 3–A. No. Q. By the way, what portion did you take off the bait-mill item 3–A. I took off one-quarter. . . Q. Of what does the fishing-gear for these 107 vessels consist 2—A. Of hooks, and lines, and keelers. sº Q. Are they not good for a second season 7–A. Hooks and lines are not, but the keelers may be so used. - Q. Do you mean to say that they throw away their hooks and lines after having been used for one season 3—A. They are no good after one S(22 SOD. Q. What else goes to make up this fishing-gear in this item of $4,815%—A. The cost of the pewter is included, I guess. Q. What proportion would you take off that for one season 3—A. Not a Cent. Q. What proportion of the money thus invested could be utilized at the end of the season 2–A. I do not think that a cent’s worth in Value could be taken off this item. The keelers get pretty Well used up at the end of the season. . Q. Surely the pewter would be good at the end of the year 3–A. I do not think so. - ** Q. Do you say as a matter of fact that this fishing-gear, including the articles you have mentioned, is absolutely valueless at the end of one fishing trip 7–A. I do. Q. Absolutely valueless, and treated so 7–A.. It is treated so. Q. Nothing can be realized from it at all 2—A. Nothing at all. Q. Where did you get the custom-house and port charges from ?—A. I obtained a good portion of them in the Dominion ; 8 cents per hogs- head of salt is charged in Gloucester for weighing-fees; and then the Vessel has to clear from Gloucester. - Q. You think that this $140 is a fair charge 2—A. Yes. Mr. Steele paid a license on his vessel during those years. Q. The next charge sets the charter of these 107 vessels at $200 a AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2647 month; you have made up this statement, I presume, to show, or to at- tempt to show, the actual result in connection with fishing-vessels, but is it the practice among the merchants who own vessels to charter them out to others?—A. No. f Q. Then this theory has no basis of fact to rest on ?—A. There are persons in Gloucester who sometimes charter vessels to go fishing. Q. But this is not the custom 2–A. No. - Q. Then of course it would be pretty difficult to arrive at a sum which it would be fair compensation to pay for a vessel; the merchants prefer to run their vessels themselves?—A. Yes; they generally do so. Q. I suppose that there is not much insurance effected on charters in Gloucester 2—A. No. Q. Did you ever know any insurance to be effected on the charter of a vessel fishing in the gulf?—A. I do not know of anything of the sort, but it is a customary charge on the charterer. Q. Is all the skipper's commission out of the net stock ($355,000) Charged against the owner 3–A. Yes. - Q. The crew do not pay any part of it 2––A. No, Q. Is it 4 per cent. or 3 per cent. that is thus paid 3––A. It is 4 per Cent. \ p t Q. The master does pretty well, then 3–A. O, yes. Q. What do you think would be the profit on the packing out of 33,645 barrels of mackerel ?—A. It would be 30 or 50 cents per barrel. Q. Taking 50 cents, that would make a profit of $16,825%—A. Fifty cents is too high a figure. Q. What would be the result?—A. When I said that, I referred to the prices which ruled during the war, when they got 50 cents. Q. Will you add up the different charges; I make them amount to $27,826; is that correct?—A. How many items have you ? Q. There is $8,500 ?–A. That was reduced to $6,200. Q. How %–A. You reduced it, and you told me to set it at $6,200. Q. You calculated the rate at 10 per cent. of $8,500 odd, and I took your own figures, leaving $8,500; then there is $2,300 for profit on salt.” —A. I did not say that; in round numbers the figures would be $1,750. Q. Then, from the bait-mill item you take off one-quarter, which amounts to $402?—A. Yes. * Q. And the profit on packing is $16,825; add these items together.— A. That makes $17,081. Q. I make it $27,000. Your sum shows a loss of $44,715, and deduct- ing this from $27,800, what have you left; do the sum, as in the other j and tell me what profit is made on the whole transaction.—A. It is $9,223. t Q. Taking the whole transaction, what profit is made instead of the awful loss you previously made out 2—A. It is $9,233. Q. And that is after the insurance companies have been paid ; this is for one season, mind.—A. Yes; it is on 107 vessels. * Q. That is after the owner has received 7 per cent. for his money; after a depreciation of $29,000 has been considered; after the taxes have been paid ; and after insurance has been obtained upon the capital invested in these vessels and upon the charter and outfits; and there has been not one cent of the risk incurred while 7 per cent. has been paid on the capital employed besides, and still you have this profit 2– A. There is $75 for each vessel. t Q. I wanted to show this sum could be worked out differently with your own figures; this $9,000 profit is more consistent with the facts; I think your figures are a little astray.—A. I am not satisfied about it. 2648 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. I suppose not.—A. From my general knowledge of the business of Gloucester I am not satisfied with that result. - Q. I find from your statements that after the Washington Treaty was entered into, Mr. Steele withdrew his vessels from your shore fishery and concentrated all his efforts on the bay; am I correct in making that statement 7–A. In 1870 and 1871 he did not send any vessels to the bay. . Q. But in 1872 he commenced sending them to the bay ?—A. Yes. Q. And he has sent them there ever since 2—A. Yes. Q. And he has since sent none to fish on your shore ?—A. No. Q. Since 1872 he has sent none to fish on your shore, but has sent all his vessels to the bay ?—A. Yes. Q. What was the average price of the mackerel caught in the Gulf of St. Lawrence realized by Mr. Steele between 1858 and 1865? In the first place, what was the average catch per vessel made by his vessels in the gulf between 1858 and 1865?–A. It was 338 packed barrels for these years inclusive, and the mackerel sold for $11.10 per barrel. Q. What was it between 1865 and 1872?—A. Two hundred and eighty barrels, which sold for $14.40, exclusive of the packing. Q. And what was it between 1872 and 1876?–A. Two hundred and twenty-three barrels, which sold for $10.01. Q. That makes an average catch per vessel of 304 packed barrels, which realized $12 a barrel ?—A. Yes. - Q. What is the average catch of his shore vessels between 1858 and 1865 %–A. It was 191 barrels. - - - Q. As against 338 barrels for the vessels which he sent to the bay. What is the average price which he realized for these mackerel ?—A. Five dollars and seventy cents per barrel. His vessels fished on our . shore for four years between those dates. Q. As against $11 received for his bay mackerel. Now take the whole period during which his vessels fished on the American shore.—A. The average time they were there employed was two months and twenty days each ; their average catch was 239 barrels, and the average price of their mackerel $7.10 a barrel. Q. As against $12 per barrel which he received for his bay mackerel. What was the share per month of the vessels which were engaged in fishing in the bay?—A. Three hundred and seventy-two dollars and sixty-six cents. Q. What was such share for the vessels which fished on the American Shore ?—A. Three hundred and ten dollars and sixty cents. Q. What was the share for each man of the crews which fished in the bay ?—A. Twenty-four dollars and eighty-four cents. Q. And what was such share of the crews which fished on the Ameri- can shore ?—A. Twenty dollars and seventy cents; but that is not a fair average, because Steele's vessels were not engaged in fishing as a rule on the American shore. Q. Am I not taking the average for corresponding years in the bay and on your shore ?—A. Yes. Q. Does it not appear that Mr. Steele must have been losing money on your shore, and that after 1872 he transferred his fishing operations wholly to the Gulf of St. Lawrence, where he has entirely kept his ves- sels since; is that a fact or not ?—A. It is, because Mr. Steele's skippers are more acquainted with gulf fishing than with fishing on Our Shore. This has always been the case with them ; they were always more ac- customed to the bay branch of the fishery than to fishing on our shore. Q. They knew where to fish there?—A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2649 MONDAY, October 15, 1877. The Conference met. -> The cross-examination of Major LOW was resumed. |By Mr. Davies: Question. I notice that in your examination on Friday, you said that the comparison with reference to Steele's vessels might not be a fair one with respect to the bay and shore fisheries, because they had been engaged in fishing a longer time in the Bay of St. Lawrence than on the American shore, and I want you to take the statement printed on page 359; and make the comparisons for corresponding periods which I will indicate. In the first place, if you take the total number of vessels which were fishing in the Bay of St. Lawrence, how many would there be "—A. 107. Q. Can you tell me, from that statement, what is the average time each vessel was occupied in fishing? Divide the total number of vessels into the time So occupied, and give the result.—A. It is 4 months and 13 days. Q. Have you it already made up 7–A. Yes; it is contained in my explanation of the summary I filed. Q. How did you make it up 3–A. I divided the time by the number of vessels. - Q. Try it again, and state the result.—A. It is 41%; months, or 4 months and 13 days. yº Did you embrace the 75 days employed in the fitting out 2—A. €S. * Q. Take it without this period and see what you make it, giving the actual time consumed from the time when they left Gloucester until they returned; I make it 3 ºr months.-A. Yes; that is it. 4 Q. Now, take the number of vessels engaged in the American coast. fishery and treat them in the same way, omitting the time employed in fitting out 3—A. It is 21%, months; I call the total period 59 months. Q. All of these vessels were mackereling?—A. One vessel was one day there. * Q. Having the average time which each vessel was so employed, I want you to take the catch which each vessel made, and the receipts obtained for those mackerel as you have them here; for instance, what was the total gulf catch 2—A. 33,645 barrels. b Q. what did these 33,645 barrels of mackerel bring”—A. $12 a. 8.TI'ê1. Q. And how much would that be in bulk 2–A. $403,832.86. Q. How much did each vessel make per month º–A. $372,343. Q. No ; I want to see how much was made per month.—A. It is all figured up here in the explanation of the summary on page 360. Q. You make it $372.66 for each vessel; then will you do the same Sum for the period during the Reciprocity Treaty 3–A. That is done, too, from 1858 to 1865 on page 360. ~ Q. But that does not show what each vessel made per month. You have given what the vessels made per month for the whole period of time, and I Want to see what it was during the Reciprocity Treaty. Take the gross catch, value it, and divide by the length of time they were in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.—A. From 1858 to 1865, I make up the number as 60 vessels, and the value of the gross catch, $225,243. Q. That leaves $3,754 for each vessel?—A. It is $401 13. Q. You have misunderstood me... I want to find out for the period 2650 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. from 1858 to 1865 what the earnings of each vessel per month were.— A. They were $16,694. - - Q. Per month for each vessel ?—A. For each vessel per month they were $401.13. s - Q. Add up the value of the catch for that period. —A. I did not add it up, but I added the vessel's share up. Q. I am not asking you about that. I am taking the table and com- ‘paring one Statement with another. I am asking you concerning the result for each vessel, and I want to see what the vessels' earnings per month were.—A. But that won’t give it. Q. Yes; you either have to pay one-half of what you catch or wages, I do not care which ; the value of the gross catch is $225.238, and there were 60 vessels, thus leaving $3,754 for each vessel for the season ; and as the average trip was 3; months, that would leave $1,000 per month by my sum. Would this be the case or not ?—A. The value of the gross catch is $225,243.29. Q. And there are 60 vessels?—A. Yes; that makes $3,754.55 for each vessel. Q. You divide that by the average number of months, 31%, 3–A.. I take the whole time that they were engaged fishing. Q. What was the length of the average trip in the bay from 1858 to 1865?–A. Eighty-three days was each vessel's average. Q. For what period of time – A. From 1858 to 1865; and this leaves $98.80 per month. Q. You are wrong ; you say that you have $3,754 for each trip ; now what is the length of time that each season occupied ?–A. 3.8 months. Q. Divide $3,754 by 3.8 and you will find that this will leave as close as possible $1,000 a month 7–A. It leaves $998. - Q. Now do exactly the same sum for the same time on the American shore. I only put you these questions because you answered previously that owing to the difference in the length of time, a fair comparison could not be made between the vessels fishing on the American shore and in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Will you kindly read the catches and make them up 7–A, The explanation of the summary which I have made up shows that the American shore fisheries realized less per month than the bay fisheries. Q. I know, but I want to learn the amount exactly. The gulf fishery realized $1,000, less $2, per month; now what do you make the gross catch for the shore fisheries 3–A. $12,713.20. Q. I make it $12,434?–A. You will find that I am right. Q. Then the number of the vessels is 12%—A. Yes. Q. What will this give for each vessel ?—A. $1,059.43. Q. Take the average length of time—the average trip 3–A. They were engaged in fishing for 19 months. Q. Dividing the number of the vessels into the results, what will it leave you ?—A. $623. Q. So that the average catch per month of the vessels employed in the American shore fishery from 1858 to 1865 amounted in value to $623, while the average catch per month of the vessels engaged in the Gulf of St. Lawrence fishery realized $998 %–A. Yes. Q. And the average value of the catch of the vessels engaged in the gulf fishing for the same period of time was $998?–A. Yes. Q. This refers entirely to the table you have put in with regard to George Steele's vessels 7–A. Yes. - - , Q. You put in another statement purporting to be a statement show- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2651 ing the difference between the American shore and the Gulf of St. Lawrence fisheries”—A. Yes. - Q. po you think that this was a fair statement 3–A. A fair state- ment, ', - - Q. Yes.—A. Why not ? Q. The counsel asked you if you had ever made up statistics relative to the shore and gulf fisheries, showing the difference between the American shore fishery and the Gulf of St. Lawrence fishery, and your answer was: “Yes; the statement is as follows.” Did you intend to file this statement as a fair statement, showing the relative difference between these two fisheries?—A. I explained what I meant right un- derneath, when I said: The average catch is based on the average catch of 84 vessels, from 17 firms, in 1869, and 28 vessels in the bay, and 62 vessels off American shore, from 20 firms in 1875. These firms have done better than the rest. - Q. Was it your intention to show the relative catches made in these two fisheries 3–A. During these two periods; yes. - Q. Did you intend that these periods should be taken as a fair repre- Sentation of the catches usually made in these two fisheries?—A. Those Were the actual catches made for those years by Gloucester vessels. Q. I only want to know whether you intended that the Commission should draw from this statement the inference that it represented fairly the relative values of these two fisheries 2—A. I so intended it for those years. Q. But did you so intend it for any other years?—A. No, I do not know anything about any other years than those in this relation. Q. Did you never make up the catches for any other years save those 2 —A. No ; those were the only years for which I ascertained the number of vessels which had been fishing in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and off the American shore. - Q. How was it that you came to ascertain this for those years?—A. It was because in 1869 I was town clerk, and I then ascertained it for the information of the people of Gloucester; and in 1875 I obtained this information for Centennial purposes. Q. You do not pretend to say that it shows anything like a fair repre- Sentation of the relative values of the two fisheries 2—A. No, save for those years. I show the number of barrels that was caught in that period in these two fisheries. a Q. Is this result not directly opposite to the result shown by an ex- amination of the catches of Mr. Steele's vessels 2–A.. I do not consider that the catches of Mr. Steele's vessels show a fair criterion in this re- Spect. - Q. But what is the actual result—you show in this statement that your shore fishery is very much better than the Gulf of St. Lawrence fishery for the two years 1869 and 1875%—A. Yes. Q. Now taking the whole number of years that Mr. Steele was en- gaged in the Gulf of St. Lawrence fisheries, is not the result directly º to the result you have shown in this statement 2—A. I know that it is. - Q. Then you did not intend that this statement should be taken by the Commission as a fair representation of the general value of these two fisheries?—A. Yes, I did. Q. For those two years 2—A. Yes. Q. But nothing more ?—A. Nothing more. Q. And this is directly opposite to the general result shown by the 2652 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. catches of Mr. Steele's vessels, in the bay for 17 years?—A. I do not think such is the general result. & Q. You said just now that it was ?—A. Yes. Q. To which statement do you adhere 7–A.. I adhere to what I have said: that the general average of Mr. Steele's vessels in the bay is not a fair estimate, because he did not pay any attention to the American Shore fisheries. * - Q. You said a moment ago that this was the case, and that it was not the case; and I want to know which you really mean,—A. I mean what I Say. Q. You stated in your examination on page 359, that Mr. Steele's firm was among the firms which were most successful, whether on your shore or in the Gulf of St. Lawrence—that he was one of the most successful On your own shore and in the gulf.-A. I beg your pardon. I never Said that ; or if I did say SO, I did not mean to say that he was the most successful on our shore. * Q. The counsel put you this question : Q. To how many firms do you refer?—A. These include the most successful firms, George Steele, &c. Q. Those are the firms that had been the most successful, whether on our shore or in the Gulf of St. Lawrence ; which are considered to be the most successful firms in Gloucester 8—A. George Steele, Leighton & Co., Dennis & Ayer, and Smith & Gott. Q. These are generally considered to be the most successful firms ?—A. Yes. A.. I did mean to say that his firm was among the most success- ul firms on our shore. I did not clearly understand the question at fthe time. Q. You did not mean to say that ?–A.. I did mean to say that this included in the aggregate the most successful firms in Gloucester, and I included George Steele as one of those firms; and I do consider him to be one of the most successful firms in the fishing business. Q. You did not mean to say that his was one of the most successful firms regarding the fishery on your coast 2—A. No ; but he was classed With the Others. Q. And if you are reported here as having said so, you wish to ex- plain the matter in that way ?—A. Certainly. & • Q. I want to know whether, as an actual fact, the figures produce by you concerning the periods of time for which Mr. Steele was engaged in the fishery on the American coast, and in the fishery in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, do not show a result entirely opposite to that made out in this statement relative to the years 1869 and 1876, which you have put in 3–A. That may be so. i Q. Is this the case or not ? Is the result as to the relative values of the American shore fishery and the Gulf of St. Lawrence fishery the same in the statement you have filed for the years 1869 and 1875 as it is when you compare the results of the whole 17 years during which Mr. Steele was engaged in these two fisheries 2—A. The result is the Same as regards this statement. Q. But does the result shown by the one statement exactly coincide with the results shown by the other statement as to the relative values of the two fisheries, or does such comparison show that the bay fishery is far more valuable than the American shore fisheries º–A. You mean by Mr. Steele's trips ? - . Q. Yes.—A. Taking Mr. Steele's statement alone it would show that, if you do not take into consideration any other consideration connected With it. Q. Taking Steele's statement as it appears here, does it not show that AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2653 the Gulf of St. Lawrence fishery is far more valuable than the Ameri- Can Shore fishery 7–A. Yes. Q. And the other statement is put in to show that the American shore fishery is more valuable than the Gulf of St. Lawrence fishery 3—A. Yes. .* Q. But this latter statement only compares results for the two years, 1869 and 1875 %–A. Yes. Q. And the other statement covers a consecutive period of 17 years?— A. This period is not consecutive. º Q. Why not ?—A. Because a good many gaps occurred between the years when his vessels were fishing. - Q. From 1858 it extends to 1875, omitting two years, I think?—A. Several more years are omitted. There were quite a number of years when Mr. Steele's vessels were not fishing on the American shore, between 1858 and 1875. During a great many years they did not fish On the American shore at all. Q. Taking the exact length of time he was engaged in the bay fishery, did not this show that it was much more valuable to him per month than was the American shore fishery per month?—A. Yes. Q. You were asked whether some of these statements were not made up for the Centennial, and you stated that this was the case ?—A. Yes. Q. Some of these statements were not made up for the purposes of this Tribunal at all, but for the Centennial 2–A. Yes. Q. And the motive for their preparation had no connection with this Tribunal 3–A. Yes—nothing whatever. Q. What did you make them up for 7—A. To show that Gloucester, in the fishing business, was the largest fishing port in the world. Q. And what was your object in showing this?—A. It was to adver- tise the place to some extent. Q. What end were you seeking to gain by advertising this?—A. I wanted to make Gloucester more known, so that we might have a better market for our fish; that was the idea. - Q. And in order to have a better market for your fish, I suppose you wanted to let capitalists know what a large business it carried on ?—A. Yes. * * Q. And you proved it to be the third largest fishing port in the World 7–A.. I think that it so stands first. * Q. I suppose you wanted to let people know that you carried on there a large fishing business which was profitable in a certain sense; you did not wish them to understand?that it was an unprofitable business?— A. Of course not. We wanted to show that this was the business of Gloucester. I did not say, and I would not say, that the business of Gloucester is unprofitable. Q. You desired to show that the fishing business was the business of Gloucester?—A. Yes. Q. And you re-affirm that here ?—A. Yes; that it is the main busi- ness of Gloucester. Q. I suppose that this business has resulted in the building up of Gloucester 2—A. Yes; to a great extent, of course. - Q. There are industrial pursuits pursued incidentally by the popula- tion, but these are not the main pursuits of Gloucester 2—A. No. I think, though, that, if anything, those other pursuits have brought more Wealth into Gloucester than the fishing business. Q. Do you think so 3–A. Yes. - -Q. What makes you think that ?—A. Well, the rich men that have 2654 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. thus come there, and built and paid taxes, have helped out the valua- tion of Gloucester. e Q. When did these rich men come there 3—A. Some of them have been there for 10 or 15 or 20 years. - Q. Would you like it to go on record, as your opinion, that Gloucester owes her prosperity more to the mercantile business, and to other inci- dental business, than to the fishing business”—A. I should not. I con- sider the fishing business of Gloucester as the main business of the place. - w Q. And the one to which she chiefly owes her prosperity ?—A. Yes. Q. Looking up the files of the Cape Ann Advertiser, with reference to the Centennial, I notice a statement relative to your fisheries, and to the effect their prosecution has had on Gloucester, to which I would like to call your attention, to see whether you agree with it or not. It is contained in this paper of date November 12, 1875, and is as follows: In 1841 the fishery business of Gloucester had reached about its lowest ebb. Only about 7,000 barrels of mackerel were packed that year, and the whole product of the fisheries of the port was only about $300,000. In 1845 the business began to revive, the Georges and Bay Chaleur fishery began to be developed, and from that time to this year, 1875, has been steadily increasing, until at the present time Gloucester's tonnage is 10,000 tons more than Salem, Newburyport, Beverly, and Marblehead united. Nearly 400 fishing-schooners are owned at and fitted from the port of Gloucester, by 39 firms, and the annual sales of fish are said to be between $3,000,000 and $4,000,000, all distributed from here by Gloucester houses. - - THE COMMERCIAL WHARVES. The wharves once covered with molasses and sugar hogsheads, are now covered with fish flakes, and the odors of the “sweets of the tropics” have given place to “the an- cient and fish-like smells” of oil and dried cod; the few sailors of the commercial marine have been succeeded by five thousand fishermen drawn from all the maritime quarters of the globe; and the wharves that were the wonders of our boyhood days are actually swallowed up in the splendid and capacious piers of the present day, so much have they been lengthened and widened. THE SAILT TRADE. For many years after the decline of the Surinam trade, hardly a large vessel was ever seen at Gloucester, and many persons thought that nevermore would a majestic ship be seen entering this capacious and splendid seaport. But never in the palmiest days of Gloucester’s foreign trade, were such immense vessels seen as at the present day. Ships of 1,500 tons (as big as six William and Henry’s) sailed into Gloucester har- bor from Liverpool and Cadiz, and came in to the wharve without breaking bulk, and also laid afloat at low water. More than forty ships, barks, brigs, and schooners, of from 400 to 1,400 tons, laden with salt alone, have discharged at this port the present year, and also the same nutmber last year. The old, venerable port never represented such a forest of masts as can now frequently be seen ; sometimes six ships and barks at a time, besides innumerable schooners. - THE CITY OF GLOUCESTER OF 1875 AND THE TOWN OF 1825. What a contrast is presented as a ship enters the harbor now, with what was pre- sented in 1825. The little rusty, weather-beaten village, with two “meeting-houses” and a few dwellings and wharves gathered around them ; two or three thousand peo- ple with $500,000 property, was all that Gloucester then was, as near as we can ascer- tain. Now the central wards, without suburban districts, contain 14,000 people, with $9,000,000 valuation. Was the valuation irrespective of the suburban districts that amount; is this correct?—A. I could not say for certain. You have the valua- tions to Gloucester for a series of years. Q. Your valuation agrees with this; but the statement says that this Valuation is irrespective of the suburban districts—you know as town clerk whether this is so or not ?—A. I was not town clerk then. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2655 Q. Do you know whether this is the case or not ?—A. I know that the whole valuation of the city does include the suburban districts. Q. The article continues: Five banks with nearly $2,000,000 capital in them (including savings); and this in- crease has arisen, not from foreign commerce, but from the once despised and insignif- icant fisheries. It will be seen by a review of the history of Gloucester, that a foreign commerce did not build the town up in population or wealth ; that from 1825 to 1850, its increase had been very small; but from 1850 to 1875, it has grown from 8,000 to 17,000 inhabit- ants, and its valuation from $2,000,000 to $9,000,000 ! It is the fisheries that have mainly caused this great change; it is the success of that branch of industry that has lined Gloucester harbor with wharves, warehouses, and packing-establishments, from the Fort to “Oakes's Cove.” It is the fisheries that have built up Rocky Neck and Eastern Point, and caused ward 3 (Gravel Hill and Prospect street) to show nearly all the gain in population from 1870 to 1875. Do you think that this picture is overdrawn as to the prosperity of Gloucester or as to the cause to which this prosperity is attributed 2– A. Well, I think that it is a little overdrawn myself. Q. You think that a little allowance ought to be made for the centen- nial year 7—A. Yes, I think so, in this respect. Q. Do you think that we should make the same allowance with regard to the papers which you have put in concerning the cost of fitting out and fishing Schooners, &c., prepared for the centennial year 2—A, No. I think that these are below rather than above the actual estimates; in fact I know that this is the case. Q. Will you kindly tell me what your vessels cost when you were in the fishing business %–A. The Cynisca cost $3,730; the C. C. Davies, $3,300; the Anna, $2,000; the Daniel McPhee, $3,500; the Ella F. Bartlett, $3,600; the R. H. Oakes, $4,200; and the I. C. Curtis, $6,500; that is the whole valuation, but I only owned shares in them. . Q. That makes an average of $3,830 for each vessel ?—A. Yes. Q. And that is the number of vessels in which you were interested ?– A. Yes. - You have given the valuations and what they cost 2—A. Yes; what they cost. g Q. This, I suppose, represents about their value 2–A. Yes, at that time. Q. Do you not think that there is a very great difference between the value of the vessels actually engaged in the fishery and the value of the fancy vessels, the cost of which you sent to the Centennial 2–A. Fancy vessels & That was the actual cost of these vessels in 1875, Q. What is the name of a vessel that cost so much 3–A. The Victor; she cost $8,800. Q. What was her size 3–A. 77 tons. Q. Was she an ordinary vessel ?—A. Yes. . . Q. Does she represent the ordinary class of vessels engaged in the fisheries 3–A. Yes. Q. How is it that your seven vessels did not cost anything like so much 3–A. That was before the war, when prices were on a gold basis. Q. IS not the American paper dollar as good as gold now 2-A. Yes; very nearly. .# Q. That reason cannot effect it ; that has nothing to do with it. I Want to know if your vessels were of an inferior class, or were they a fair Sample of the usual run of fishing-vessels 2—A. They were a fair Sample of the vessels which were then engaged in the fisheries. Q. We are to understand that this is about the average value of the Vessels engaged in the fisheries 7–A. Yes; at that time. 2656 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. That was when a dollar currency was worth a dollar in gold, and the dollar currency is almost worth that now ; do you mean to say that the cost of building vessels now is dearer than it was then 7–A. I do; and it is a great deal dearer. P Q. Why?—A.. I do not know why; but it is due, I think, to the in- creased value of labor and of material. I know that these do cost more now than they did then. They now cost double as much as they did then. - Q. You stated that you were interested in 8 vessels and you have only named 7 ?—A. I only fitted out the schooner Electric Flash, but I have included her catch. Q. You were not directly interested in her ?–A. No ; save only as an outfitter. She was a very successful vessel, and I merely mentioned her to show her catch in the gulf. - Q. Have you thought over the question of bait, since Friday, to find Out whether or not the bait that is charged against a vessel, when she goes on a fishing-voyage, is generally all used?—A. Yes; this is the case when they get a full trip. Q. We know, as a matter of fact, that vessels do not generally get full trips; now, suppose that a vessel gets only half a trip, and returns to Gloucester, is not the bait left from that which she took with her When she went on her voyage still good bait 3–A. Yes. Q. Therefore, that voyage could only be charged with the actual quantity of bait used ?–A. That is all she is charged with. - Q. What do you mean by that ?—A. What I say; that if any bait is returned it is credited in the gross stock of her catch. Q. I notice that, in the statement concerning the Oliver Eldridge, you charged that vessel with 55 barrels of slivers, pogies, at $6.50, from the Eclipse; was this not previously charged to the Eclipse 3—A. No. Q. How do you know that ?—A. These pogies came from the Eclipse. Q. What is she 3—A. A bait Seiner. Q. You also charge $7.50 for clams from iast year 7—A. That was Credited back to a vessel last year. - - Q. Was this credited in the trip-book?—A. Yes. Q. Will you get me the trip-book, and show me the entry 3–A. I do not know what vessel it was; but if I knew this I could show the entry. Q. You have the schooner Oliver Eldridge mentioned here, and it must appear there ?—A. It is not credited from her trip last year, of COU! I'Sé. Q. Surely you can tell by looking at the trip-book 2––A. I can see on the trip-book where credit is given under the catch of mackerel for so many barrels of bait returned; that is the way it is done before the Stock charges are taken out. The mackerel are credited first, then the pogies returned ; the bait returned is credited under the mackerel, and added in, and then comes the stock charges, which are deducted from both bait and mackerel. Q. That may be so *——A. It is so. - Q. The trip-book does not refer to any particular lot in this regard 2– A. No ; the returned bait is simply taken out of the vessels and stored a Way. Q. Show me the trip of the vessel where this is credited ; as almost every vessel has a short fare, such an entry must appear in nearly every account 3–A. This is not always so. - Q. Why not, if any bait is left 7––A. It is so if any is left. Q. Every vessel not having a full fare must have something to credit stock charges; and this will make a tremendous difference in 107 ves- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2657 sels 2—A. I see that Mr. Steele, in making up his Voyages, has charged for the bait used, but has not taken in all the bait they carried. Q. How do you know that ?—A. Don’t you see 27 barrels. Q. Just tell me what there is to justify you in supposing that ?—A. Well, there was 27 barrels used in catching 219 barrels of mackerel according to that. They will be likely to carry more bait than 27 barrels. Q. But you find, I understand, that there is no credit to the stock charges in the books 3–A. I don’t See any. Q. You can find them 3–A. No. Q. Now you assume he has only charged the bait actually used. But I want to know this. There is nothing on the face of the book?—A. No; there does not appear to be on that book, but I think I have seen it somewhere on some books. Q. What schooner was that ?—A. The George S. Loring. Q. Now, you see if you go by that rule A. You cannot go by any rule On bait. - Q. Well, here is the schooner. She took 226 barrels; but she is charged with 55 barrels of bait º–A. I know it. Q. Would you assume from this that he had only charged what was actually used ?–A. I should presume so. - Q. Why?—A. Because, in regard to using bait some vessels and some skippers use very much more bait than others. Some of the most suc- cessful skippers are most liberal with bait. - Q. In other words, you just assume that what was there was actually used ?–A. Because I see no more, and from my judgment of the way the mackerel are caught. Here is a credit—Schooner Charles Carroll; she was in Bay St. Lawrence in 1863; debtor 40 barrels slivers, 12 bar- rels clams, less 4 barrels slivers and 1 barrel of clams sold to schooner Madame Roland. #y - Q. Madame Roland is another of his vessels that is in the commence- ment of the account. Well, we will take a vessel that is going to haul up.–A. There is the schooner Austerlitz. She had 8 barrels of clams, “less 1 barrel clams left.” There is another where she ran short of bait and got it from another vessel. Here is the schooner Grenada. Q. What year 7–A. 1863. Eighteen barrels slivers, 6 barrels clams, 2 barrels from schooner Altamaha in bay, less 7 barrels bait left. Q. Well, in that other book we examined underneath your hand, I would like to know if you could find any in that ?—A. No; I don’t see any. Q. So I presume there is none left ; either none left or none credited ?– A. If there was any left it was taken out of the bait before the bait was entered on the trip-book, because I know the bait is always accounted for at the end of the voyage. Q. Was Mr. Steele accustomed to take out licenses 7–A. He was. Q. How are they charged ? In the trip-books?—A. I think they are. I think I saw them on the trip-books. Q. You are sure of that ?—A. I am pretty certain. Q. That they are charged on the trip-books against the voyage, part Of stock charges º–A. Yes. - . . . Q. That would be then that the owner would pay half and the crew half º–A. What year were they " - - Q. 1866 and 1867. If they were charged in that way, the owner would pay half and the crew half?—A. If they are charged in that Way—yes. - Q. Can you give me the name of some one vessel that took a license 3– 167 F - 26.58. Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. A. [Refers to the book.] I find a fishing license was charged to the Alhambra. # - Q. I suppose when you made up the statement of charges they were included in the custom-house and port charges you put in 3–A. I think they are. They comprise a portion of that. - - Q. So of course now that they are not payable, they could not be charged for the years they are not payable %–A. No. Q. Now, in reading this book, “Fisheries of Gloucester,” published by Procter, but—before I refer to that, have you been looking into the question of Salt 3–A. Yes. A - Q. What is the freight of a hogshead of salt from Liverpool?—A.. I don’t know. Q. You can’t tell ?—A. No; because I don’t know. Q. On page 75 of this book I find that there were imported in 1870 20,136; hogsheads of Liverpool salt, costing $8,673; of Cadiz salt 24,879; hogsheads, valued at $13,910. In 1875 the imports were 74,032 hogs- heads of Cadiz salt, and 20,480 of Liverpool, 10,966 of Trepani, 3,008 Turk’s Island, making a total of 108,486. The salt used was 106,245. hogsheads. The value of the salt, as appears, there, would be from 45 to 47 cents per hogshead.—A. I don’t know anything about that. I know what it sold for. Q. You are speaking of the price of salt as sold out. I am speaking of the value of the salt there.—A. That I don’t know anything about. Q. What do you find it sold for—the wholesale prices º–A. I don’t know. Q. Now one question. I understood you that in former years the mackerel-fishermen and owners of mackerel-vessels used to insure their vessels in Boston insurance offices 7–A. I think they did. Q. But of late years they have found it more profitable to form a Imutual company 3–A. Yes. - \Q. That of course divides the losses among themselves, and they di- vide the profits, and really these 39 men who own all the fishing vessels of Gloucester are formed into a mutual insurance company " If they make $1,000 or $20,000, they get back their money in the shape of divi- dends; so it is really like paying a duty and getting it back. It is a drawback. Now, have you examined and can you tell me what profits are made by this company º–A. I cannot. Q. You don’t know %–A. I guess the assessments come oftener than the dividends. Q. Do you know so?—A. Yes. - Q. Now I would like to know whether you are speaking at haphazard, because I have a statement under my hand.— A. Well, I haven’t been of late years acquainted with the working of the insurance companies; but when I was in business I know I had to pay assessments. Q. Were you a shareholder 3—A. Yes; all owners of vessels are. Q. You have had to pay some calls. Now in this book, the “Fisheries of Gloucester,” on page 73, a table of losses is given running from 1830 to 1875. There was 333 losses, that is, an average annual loss of seven vessels for these years. For the past five years the average loss has been greater, but that would be the total number. Now I have gone to the trouble of making up a little sum, and I think there must be a very handsome dividend divided somewhere, if they pay 4 per cent. as you have said. You haven’t made a statement yourself?—A. No ; but you may rest assured, when I go home, I shall go into this insurance busi- ness and know about it. AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 2659 By Mr. Whiteway : } Q. Have you ever been personally engaged in packing mackerel?—A. I have. Q. Curing fish 7–A. Yes; I have. Q. Are you quite clear there is any salt used in the curing of fish after having been put into the waterhouse and washed out 3—A. No, Sir ; there is none. * Q. I thought you were mistaken in your examination on that sub- ject?—A. I stated that there was salt put in before it was waterhawsed. Q. Is there any before it is waterhawsed?—A. There is. Q. Are you clear on that?—A. Yes; there is about four barrels in a butt, that is, eight quintals. f Q. You are quite clear on that ?—A. I am. Q. Now, you gave us a statement of the operations of the Pharsalia, on a Grand Bank voyage in 1875. That vessel was out how long 7–A. Three months and eight days. Q. In 1875?—A. Yes, sir. Q. You took this from the trip-book?—A.. I did. Q. Well, now, what induced you to make the selection of this trip as an illustration of the cost of a vessel using fresh bait and going to the Grand Bank 3—A. Because it covered so many ports which she entered, and the different rates charged for ice and bait. Q. Is it not the most expensive trip that is in that book 3–A. I think not. Q. Turn up the other that is more extensive. See if you can find a more expensive trip than that. What years does that event cover ?—A. 1874, 1875, and a portion of 1876. Q. Now is not this the most expensive trip made by any vessel using fresh bait during these years 3–A. After referring to the book—it may be. From what examination I have made, I think it may be. Q. As far as you have gone, you find it to be the most expensive trip 3—A. Yes. & - Q. Now, in contrast to that, you take the trip of a schooner—Madam IRoland—using salt bait, for the year, 1873, is it not ?—A. Yes. Q. She fitted with Salt bait?—A. Yes. Q. Now, on the other hand, the result of that trip was particularly prosperous 3—A. No, sir. - Q. For that year 7—A. For that year. Q. Have you the trip-book 3–A. Yes, I have. (Reads from memo- randum as follows:) Schooner George B. Loring. Trip-book No. 9, page 32. Trip to Grand Bank, with salt bait, from June 8th to August 30th, 1874—2 months 22 days—$2,835.97 net stock. Page 91. From Septem- ber 10th to November 27th, 2 months 17 days, with fresh bait, $1,538.03 net stock. Schooner Everett Steele, Trip-book No. 9, July 21 to September 22nd, 1873. Salt bait, $3,756.25 net stock. Schooner Madam Roland. Book 8, page 342, June 19 to Aug. 14, 1873, 2 months 5 days, with salt bait stocked, $4,331.80 net stock. Aug. 26 to Oct. 10, 1873, Salt bait, 1 month 14 days, stocked $2,608.07 net stock. Q. Now, how do you know that these vessels used fresh bait as well as salt —A. I presume they did; that bait was caught on the Banks. 2660 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Didn’t these vessels go into any port after leaving Gloucester, and get fresh bait 2–A. No. - Q. You are certain of that ?—A. Yes. Q. From what ?—A. From the trip-book. Q. Can you rely always on the statements in the trip-book 7–A. I Can, because the bait is always charged to stock. Q. You can always rely on the statements made in the trip-book?— A. Yes. Q. Now, turn to the trip-book of the Knight Templar in 1876. Where does it appear that the vessel went in for fresh bait º–A. She went into Bliss Island. 4. - Q. Anywhere else ?—A. No, sir. Q. IXoes it not say anywhere else ?—A. She went in for ice to St. Pierre. Q. Didn't she get bait 3–A. Yes. - Q. Who was the captain of that vessel ?—A. Captain Gray, I think. Q. Well, he swears that upon that trip he was into Hermitage Bay and Bliss Island 2–A. Where is Hermitage Bay ? | Mr. Foster remarks that Captain Gray didn’t say that he went into Nova Scotia anywhere for bait, and that “Bliss Island " may be a mis- print for Bois Island in Newfoundland. Mr. WHITEWAY. I only refer to it to show that the trip-book cannot be implicitly depended upon. & Q. Do you consider that it is a fair criterion as regards the advan- tages either of salt bait or of fresh bait to take one trip in 1873 and one trip in 1875, one being a salt-bait trip and the other a fresh-bait trip, and draw conclusions as to the advantages of each respectively. Do you consider it fair or not to take this as a basis 2—A. Let me explain in my answer. When I drew off this - - Q. I ask you a question. You can explain afterwards. (Question repeated.)—A. I didn't draw any conclusions from that. Q. I am asking the question whether you consider it fair upon such premises to draw a conclusion ?—A. No ; I don’t. I didn’t draw a con- Clusion on those two trips. - Q. Didn’t you intend to show to the Commission by those two state- ments the advantages of salt bait and fresh 3–A. I did. With the same catch of fish. They were the only two vessels. I could get. I didn’t want to take two trips in vessels that were wide apart. By Mr. Foster: Q. Wide apart from what?—A. Wide apart in the catch. I might have taken extreme ones, but I wanted to give a fair average between the two. By Mr. Whiteway: Q. Could not you find a fresh-bait one that stocked as much as the salt-bait ones you gave 7–A. No. - Q. Do you mean to say there haven’t been many over and above the one you have given 3–A. I am not aware of it. - e Q. You see Captain Malloy stocked with fresh bait 3,700, and he didn’t consider that a very large catch. Now, can you tell me whether the Bank fishing for 1875 was a poor fishery, below the average, or a large fishery, above the average 7–A.. I could not tell you. Q. Have you never heard it was below the average; that is, year be- fore last, the Bank fishery 7–A. No ; I have never heard it was below the average. •. - , a ‘ - Q. Do you know what the Bank fishing was in 1873, whether it was AWARD OF THE FISHERY, COMMISSION. 2661 above or below the average?—A. I don’t know. I form my opinion from what I saw on Steele's books. * Q. Now, look at the trip of the Pharsalia, at which you were looking just now.—A. I have it before me. Q. You see there is an item headed “damaged fish, at one cent a pound.” You see that ?—A. Yes. f - - Q. Will you find in the trip-book, which you presented here, another case of a Grand Bank fishing-vessel fishing with fresh bait, where there has been any damaged fish for these three years, 1874, 1875, and 1876?–A. The schooner Knight Templar. (Reads items of outfit, among others an item showing that she was on a salt-bait trip). Q. Then there is damaged fish on a salt-bait trip º–A. Yes. Q. Now find another case on a fresh-bait trip. (Witness refers to book.) Q. I would like, if you have any doubt, if you would take time.—A. That is a very small amount of bait to catch 226 barrels. Q. I don’t think you will find any. You see fish may be damaged on board a salt-bait vessel fishing on the Banks as well as on a fresh-bait, trip.–A. I see it. Q. Now, will you look, please, at the Pharsalia, on the next trip, after she landed the cargo of which you put in an account 7–A. That was in 1873, was it not ? Q. No, 1875.-A. She foundered at Sea. Q. Was she an old vessel ?—A. No. Q. What age was she 3—A. The abstract will tell exactly. I can’t tell (after referring to abstract). She was brand new. She was lost on her second trip. - - Q. You stated in your examination-in-chief, in relation to the dam- age to the Pharsalia’s fish, as follows: Q. Before you leave that I want to ask you in reference to an item there—“damaged codfish.”—A. 18,159 pounds of damaged cod, at one cent, $135.10. Q. Why should there be this damaged codfish 3 What is the cause of it 2–A. Well, I have my own opinion of the cause. Q. What do you believe to be the cause 3—A. I believe the cause is going in so much for fresh bait. • Q. How should that damage the codfish 7–A. My opinion is that the salters salted it with the idea that they would not go in so much, and didn’t put so much salt on it. When she went into port so much, going into the warm water it heated. Now, you find there are damaged fish, as well with salt-bait fishing, as With fresh 7–A. I do find it. Q. And it is upon that one case of damaged fish with fresh bait that you arrive at this conclusion ?—A. I could not account for it in any other way. - - Q. But it is this one case that you drew this conclusion from ?—A. Yes. Q. And you would lead the Commission to believe, then, that fish was liable to be damaged, because of vessels going in for fresh bait, because of this one vessel on this one cruise?—A. No, I don’t now, I have seen that other case. - Q. You withdraw what you said before ?—A. I withdraw as far as that is concerned. - Q. Have you ever been on the Banks fishing?—A. I haven’t. Q. Then, you would not presume to put your opinion in contradiction to the opinion of experienced men who had been there six or seven years, if they testified contrary to you?—A. No, sir; of course not. 2662 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. By Mr. Dana : Q. Turning to page 367 of your testimony, you will find the following question and answer: f ‘Q. Now, can you give us a similar statement of the cost of a vessel for trawling halibut on the Banks, made out in the same manner for the Centennial?—A. Yes; I have it, as follows: Ǻ Cost of a new schooner at Gloucester, Mass., in 1875, fitted for trawling halibut on the Banks. Wessel of 71 tons; cost $8,000. Wessel made nine trips to Western and Grand Banks, being at sea 302 days, with 12 men for crew, at the following expense, viz: Trawl-gear ------------------------------------------------------------- $1,023 25 Vessel's expense account ------------------------------------------------ 1,823 25 Provisions, &c.--------------------------------------------------------- 1,426 03 General charges, ice, bait, salt, &c.-------------------------------------- 1, 135 50 5,408 64 Now, whose schooner was that ?–A. Joseph O. Procter's. Q. Now, take the vessel's expense account, $1,825.25; is that taken from Proctor's own account º–A. Yes, sir; he gave it to me. Q. It was not anything you made up 7–A. No, sir. Q. Now, on page 374 the following questions and answers are re- ported: * By Mr. Dana : - - Q. Now, you have here in this broadside the vessel's expense account, $1,825.25. Do they call that an expense account ? Is that the way they entitle it on the books in making up the account %–A. No; it is all put in one account. All the things for the vessel are put in one account. These were separated for this special purpose. Q. Now, you take this expense account, what period of time does it cover?—A. Three hundred and two days. - l Q. Now, what are the items of the vessel's expense account 3–A. They are as fol- OWS : Vessel, 71 tons; cost, $8,800. Fitted for trawling halibut. TRAWL-GEAR. Twine --------------------- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * $5 00 8 baskets ----------------------------------------------------------- 6 40 22 buoys ------------------------------------------------------------- 11 00 20 buckets -----------------------------------------------------, ---- 5 00 46 files--------------------------------------------------------------- 6 58 1,483 lbs. ground-lines.--------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 444 90 346 lbs. gauging-lines-------------------------------------------------- 410 72 26 knives ------------------------------------------------------------ 15 60 12 stones------------------------- * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 75 32 staffs -------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 25 360 lbs, buoy-line.----------------------------------- * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 64 80 4 doz. brooms ------------------------------------------------------- 9 60 52 gross hooks-------------------------------------------------------- 109 20 23 lbs. lobster-twine -------------------------------------------------- 8 05 3 dories------------------------------------------------------------- 130 00 Iron and copper tanks --------------------------------------------------- 1 27 4 shovels-------------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - 3 00 Anchors ---------------------------------------------------------------- 40 00 Oars and scoops.-------------------------------------------------------- 47 13 1,023 25 VESSEL’S EXPENSE. & Spun yarn -------------------------------------------------------------- $7 48 Parceling -------------------------------------------------------------- 23 00 Leather----------------------------------------------------------------- 11 29 Jib hanks.--------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 30 Nails ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 32 Tinware, &c ------------------------------------------------------------ 79 50 1 anchor lost.... . ------------------------------------- a ºn tº as tº ſº ºn we sº ºn - - - - - - - - 48 96 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2663 Topmast (broken).---- tº sº º me tº as tº º sº se tº ºr m ºn tº tº e º me me we tº as ºs º ºs e º 'º as ºr ºr e ºs º ºs º ºs e º an ºr ºn tº gº tº sº tº º º $12 00 Paint and painting------------------------------------------------------ 90 00 Railway fee.------------------------------------------------------------ 15 00 Rigger---------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 47 00 Blacksmith ---------------------------------------------- a sº e º 'º º sº tº gº sº a * * * * 60 00 Carpenter-------------------------- ... • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * s ºn º ºs º gº ºs ºs ºn tº sº º ºs º ºs e tº 65 00 Sailmaker's repairs ------------------------------------------------------ 163 00 Lumber for ice-house---------------------------------------- * * as º gº & º º ºs º ºs ºf 43 00 Insurance--------------------------------------------------------------- 539 00 Commissions to skipper-------------------------------------------------- 465 00 40 tons ballast ---------------------------------------------------------- 80 00 Swivel gun ... ----------------------------------------------------------- 38 00 Tarring rigging, &c.----------------------------------------------------- 14 00 1,823 85 Q. Now many of those are actually consumable during the Season, SO that at the end of the season what is left is of little account. But there are some items that may last over another year. Now, except in the case of some large permanent expenditures, in making up this account do they charge an article that may last one or two years to the year in which it is bought, or do they undertake to distribute it over the time for which it is likely to last 2—A. No ; it is charged to the véssel at the time it is procured. Q. They don’t undertake to distribute such things over the time they would probably be useful ?—A. No. Q. Would it be practicable to do that except where it might be re- quired, as for instance in chancery proceedings 7–A. No. Q. Is that considered as giving a fair result in the end, charging the articles as they are bought, although some of them may outlast the year?—A. That is the way it is usually done. Q. Then you know this to be an actual account furnished by Mr. Proctor”—A. Yes. - Q. It is made up according to the usage %–A. Yes. Q. If you were asked to make an equitable assessment of all these charges, for instance, if it was an estate that required to be settled, or if it were required to assign to each year the portion of the expenses that would strictly fall to the account of that particular year, you would have to make a differencei n the case of articles that lasted over this one year 2-—A. Yes. Q. But that would not be the way the expense account is practically made up 3–A. No. Q. But this is the way they do the business %–A. Yes. Q. And the statement you presented was the actual statement of the expenses of that vessel for the year taken 3—A. Yes. Q. Have you ever put in an account of what would be the annual ex- penditure, supposing the cost of such articles to be distributed over the years during which they would last 7–A. No ; I have not. f |. Have you since prepared such a statement 3–A. I have ; it is as OILOWS : Average yearly expense of a Gloucester fishing vessel, engaged for nine months in the fisheries, the average life of the vessels being about 14 years. Paint and painting, twice yearly.---------- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * = º sº ºn * * * * * * * * * * * * $150 00 Marine railway, fees for hauling out--------------------------------------- 30 00 # of new suit of sails (have to be renewed once in two years) --------------- 300 00 9rdinary expense for repairs and storage of sails.-------------------------- 40 00 # of set standing rigging, $5 for junk -----,------------------------------ 20 00 # running rigging, yearly (has to be renewed every 2 years). ---------------- 125 00 # riggers, average yearly cost (overhauling rigging once in 4 years, $75) ---. 18 75 # of (230 fathoms 83 inch cable every 3 years) $450. ----...--------...--------- 150 00 2664 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. One anchor average loss yearly ------------------------------------------- $45 00 } of calking (vessel has to be recalked once in 7 years for $140) $20, additional cost yearly besides, $15.------------------------------------------------ 35 00 Tin Ware and StoveWare. ------------------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20 00 # of cook’s stove (renewed once in three years, for $30) --------------...----- 10 00. # of cabin stove (renewed once in three years, for $10).--------------------- 3 50. Lanterns and lamp-chimneys---------------------------------------------- 8 50. Stove-funnels, yearly ----------------------------------------------------- 5 00 - 959 25. One-half for gulf fishing, 43 months--------------------------------------- 479 62 Then I have the expenses of mackerel-fishing gear for a season of 4; months, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, put on board of a Gloucester Schooner: Expenses of makerel-fishing gear for a season of 4% months in Gulf of St. Lawrence, put on board of a Gloucester schooner. Average— 5 gross mackerel hooks, at 90c ------------------------- * * * * * = e tº º ºs sº º sº e º sº me tº as - $4 50 7# doz. mackerel lines, at $1.50. --------------------------------------------- 9 37 2 cod-fishing lines fitted, $5, less one returned.------------...--------------- 2 50 12 bbls, block-tin, at 50c ---------------------------------------------------- 6 00: 2 doz. bait-knives, at $1.25.------------------------------------------------- 2 50 1 doz. splitting knives, at $1.25.-------------------------------------------- 1 25. 1 clam-chopper, $2---------------------------------------------------------- 2 00 3 nests keelers, at $3.--------------- * † tº º sº sº ſº tº gº tº tº sº gº tº me tº e º ºs º º is use º ºs º º sº tº *º gº tº º sº tº º sº gº tº ſº 9 00 1 dozen scrub-brooms, at $3 ...----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 00. 1# dozen buckets ----------------------------------------------------------- 4 50 # dozen adzes, $3, less 3 returned, $1.50-----. --------------------------------- 1 50 # dozen flagging-irons, $3, less 3 returned, $1.50. -------...---------------------- 1 50 5 pounds flags for barrels, at 40 cents -----...---------------. * = º sº º º º sº º ºs º º s º º ºs 2 00: 3jig-molds, $1.50, less 1 returned, 50 cents ----- * * * > * * * * * * * * * * * s is nº º sº e sº me tº sº º sº º sº ºn 1 00 2 ladles, $1, worth one-half returned.---------------------------------------- 50 # dozen bushel-baskets, at $6.----------------------------------------------- 3 00 2 bait-boxes, $4, worth half returned. - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * = = * * * * * = - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 00 # dozen bait-heavers, at $3.------------------------------------------------- 1 50 15 mackerel-gaffs, at $1,50---------------------------------------------------- 7 50 65 12 Q. Is there any material change to be made in the general charges for provisions, trawl-gear, &c. 3–A. I don’t make any. I leave the statements I have put in just as they stand, because they are actual statements of the cost of those things on a particular vessel at the time shown in the Statements. * Q. Charged in the way they charged them ?—A. Yes. Q. These statements you have made for your own information. I did not ask you to do so; but these statements you have just read show what the items would be if you had to make a nice distribution of the cost over the time during which they would last 3–A. Yes. Q. Well, then, when Mr. Davies treated the statement of expense put in before as being an exact equitable assessment on each year, that was not what you meant, was it 3–A. Of course not. Q. Now, I observe in Mr. Davies' cross-examination that he took up the Daniel McPhee. The evidence is reported as follows: Q. When was it prepared ?—A. It was prepared before I left home. Q. What was the tonnage of the Daniel McPhee ?—A. About 60 tons, I think. Q. You prepared this statement yourself?—A. Yes. From your own books?--A. Yes. Q. Will you read the column of catches in which the 17 barrels appeared ?–A. 543, 230, * 41, 17, 86%, 244, 207, 275, 325, 310, 326%, 385, 57. They are shore and gulf IORIX 650i, Q. Will you take out the shore ?—A. 57, 864. Q. The catehes on your shore appear to be small compared with the others?—A. The S6% barrels were caught in five days off our shores. AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 2665 Q. But the small catches appear to have been taken on your shore. The 300 barrel catches you have read were taken in the bay ?—A. Not all of them. Q. I asked you to read those which were caught on your shores. You did read them. Were not the 300 barrel catches taken in the bay ?—A. Yes; those were caught in the gulf. Now, that one column that Mr. Davies called for is of the first trips of all the vessels 7–A. Yes. Q. Now, does that give a fair indication of the relative value of the shore and gulf fisheries 7–A. I don’t think it does. Q. Why not ?—A. Because there was more fishing on the shore on the second trip than on the first. Q. The question was confined to the first trip 3–A. Yes; some made only one trip in the gulf. - Q. Now, on page 383, there is a question, “Is not Mr. Steele what you call a fish merchant 7" and the answer is, “He is not a fish buyer.” Is that correct as it stands " What does it mean 3–A. We have men in Gloucester known as buyers aside from the merchants who carry on the business. - - Q. They buy, cargoes when they are brought in ?—A. Yes. Q. Do they prepare them for market after they have been salted and packed 3–A. Yes. - Q. Well, they are the men that cut them up into strips?—A. Cod- fish, yes. - Q. They are buyers of codfish as well as buyers of mackerel?—A. Yes. Q. Then Mr. Steele is not one of those, but sells? You are asked, “Does he sell his own fish that his vessels have caught?” and answer “He does.” What do you mean by that answer %–A. I mean that he Sells them to the buyers. - Q. He does not send them to market 2—A. No. Q. So he does not sell his own fish in the sense that he is a general Seller, wholesale and retail, or jobber, but he sells to “buyers ”?—A. Yes. - Q. In other words, he is a producer 7—A. Yes. Q. Now on page 182 you are asked and answer as follows: Q. Take vessels fishing off your own coast. With regard to wear and tear, don’t you think the wear and tear of vessels fishing off your own coast would be more than that of vessels fishing in the gulf during the months they fish there?—A. I do not. Q. Not in the winter season 3—A. We fish on our shores all the year round. Q. IS not the wear and tear greater on your coast than in the gulf during the sum- mer months when they fish there?—A. I should say it was. Q. How did you understand that ?—A. I supposed it to allude to the Winter season. * - - Q. Now, comparing your wear and tear on your own coast during these 43 months with the wear and tear in the gulf during the same period, which would be the greatest ?—A. I should say in the gulf. Q. What advantages are there on our coast apart from its being less boisterous?—A. Harbors more handy. Q. Anything else?—A. Well, they have more facilities of seeing the Storm signals to avoid danger. *- Q. You have no doubt that for the same period of time our shore is less dangerous than the gulf. Now in autumn vessels are not permitted to go to the gulf. Is any vessel permitted to sail for the gulf from Gloucester after the 1st of November?—A. I think not. Q. Do not the insurance companies go round and close up their busi- ness after the 1st November 2—A. Yes; that is the general practice. It used to be the practice always to close up after the 1st November. 26.66 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. The vessels then out were allowed to come in; they had their poli- cies renewed or extended ?–A. Yes. Q. At certain rates?—A. Yes; increased rates. Q. Now, turning to page 384, you are asked and answer as follows: Q. What would you be prepared to say to-day is the profit they make on supplies furnished to the families of fishermen 3–A. About ten per cent. Q. Not more than that ?—A. It would not be over that. - Q. You know that sometimes they lose the supplies 3–A. I know they do. - d Q. And don’t they make sufficient profit to cover all that ?–A. I don’t think they O. - * # j 4. - Q. You think they are not shrewd enough men to make the charge sufficient to in- sure them against loss %–A. They might. i Q. What do you mean by that ?—A. Well, I mean this, that Some might do it. - w º Q. Now, do they in point of fact, do the Gloucester merchants charge interest on the cash they advance to the families of seamen 3–A.. I don’t think they do. - Q. Did you ever know an instance in which it was done º–A. No. Q. It might be and you not know it, but your opinign is that they do not ?—A. Yes. º Q. Why is it that they do not ? Is the period long 2—A. No ; not as a general thing. - Q. And do you think they charge any more than the retail prices 3– A. They do not. Q. So as far as the families are concerned, the profits are the differ- ence between retail and wholesale 2 Now is there any public opinion that bears on that sort of thing 2—A. Yes; I think if any vessel-owner was to take advantage of the families of the crew, he would not get crews to go for him. - ' Q. The fishermen, of course, find out about it when they get home 3– A. Yes; they very soon know. t - - Q. They are not obliged to go for the same owners again 3–A. No. Q. It is for the interest of the owners, where there is so much com- petition, to treat the men well ?—A. Yes. Q. Now there is another inquiry: Q. Would you put the four leading men in Gloucester down at worth from $20,000 to $30,000 each 7–A. I don’t think anybody in the fishing business in Gloucester is worth over $30,000. * Q. Do you mean to include the money made outside the fishing busi- ness %–A. No. - Q. Now as to Mr. Steele's property; it only goes to the value of your opinion and does not affect your credit, but I want that put right. I think you said Mr. Steele's property was taxed at $20,000. Now state what the assessment is based on according to Massachusetts law. Is it not on what property would sell at for cash 7–A. Yes. Q. Not sold on credit & It does not of course mean a forced sale, but with reasonable notice. Now, you speak of his having nine vessels run- ning and put them at an average of $5,000 %–A. Yes. Q. Now, do you think that is a proper sum to put in making up the account between Mr. Steele and his own vessels º–A. I do. Q. What do you think those nine vessels or any one of them would have sold for this year in cash, the sale being made at Gloucester with *gºve time and notice? Would they bring anything like $5,000 3– . No. - - Q. It would be difficult to determine 3–A. Yes. Q. The number put on the market affects the price 3—A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2667 Q. The vessels being designed solely for the fishing business, would not Sell as would other vessels?—A. No. Q. But suppose Mr. Steele was living and wanted to close up his business, but was in no hurry and could take his own time about it, and could sell them for cash or at credit, and could take them to any port Where there seemed to be a demand—he might, by taking plenty of time, exercise skill and judgment, and selling on credits, realize $5,000 each, for the vessels?—A. Yes. Q. In other words, is there any necessary connection between what nine fishing vessels would bring sold for cash on reasonable notice, not forced, and the value which ought to be taken when settling between º: and his vessels as to the result of their voyages 3–A.. I think there is. Q. Do you wish to alter your estimate that in making up those ac- counts Mr. Steele's vessels should be entered at $5,000 each 7–A. No. Q. You were asked a number of questions in regard to Mr. Steele's taxable property. His taxable property you first estimated at $20,000. You afterwards thought it would be $25,000, and you said you thought he would be worth $35,000. When you made your first estimate you Were asked what the firm was worth. Did you think at the time of in- cluding any personal property Mr. Steele might have, and real estate, disconnected with the business?—A. I did not. - Q. Do you wish to change your statement 2 Are you inclined to put his property at more than $35,000 %–A. I think that is really the cash Value. Q. At the same time, you would not alter the mode of making up the accounts?—A. I think the vessels are worth $5,000 in his business. . Q. Those vessels, no doubt, all stand in his name, but do you know Whether he owns the whole of all of them?—A. I don’t know. I pre- Sume he does not. Q. Why so 2 Eſe is a rich man.—A. Nearly every owner in Glouces- ter has more or less shares of his vessels owned by his skippers. Q. Is it for the interest of the vessel owner that his skipper shou d be interested in the ship º–A. It is generally supposed so. - Q. What portion does a skipper generally own in a vessel in cases *: he is not a capitalist º–A. The owner generally gives him one- Ourth. . Q. And he pays for it as he can 3–A. Yes. Q. Do you know whether that is a matter of personal trade, or, is the Captain's name entered at the custom-house?—A. There is a bond some- times. Q. A bond between them ?–A. Yes. Sometimes a bill of sale is given and a mortgage taken back. Q. On page 387 of your evidence there is the following: Q. You have proved him from theory to be bankrupt beyond all redemption, when in . fact he is a capitalist worth $45,000, which exhibits the difference between the practi- cal statement and the theory—A. Yes; but he had capital when he went into the business. Q. Did you mean to say that $45,000 was his capital 2–A. I think I hardly answered it in that way; I might have said it, if it is so recorded. Q. The evidence also reads: * Q. Do you state that he brought it in with him 7–A. One-half of it was made in the sail-making business. Q. Then one-half of the capital he now has was made in the sail- making business º–A. I should think so. 2668 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. And the rest in the fishing business during 19 years. You meant to say that he brought into the business the capital he had made as a sailmaker, and added to it from the fishing business during 19 years?— A. Yes. ºr - Q. On page 387 of your evidence there is the following: Q. And that shows the values at which he settled with his men ?—A. Ye . A% Does it show the actual cash price which he received for these 33,645 barrels 2– . Yes. t * - e Q. Will you explain?—A. Remember that this is for the fish and the packing which he receives when he sells the trip. Explain what that means.—A. When he sells the fish the barrel is sold With it, so that the packing is included in the sale. In the books it is made up without charging the packing in the value of the fish ; and when he sells it, he sells it with the barrel. Q. And when he settles with his crew the packing is taken out of the price?—A. Yes; that is customary. - Q. On page 388 of your evidence there is the following: Q. Then his expenditure for the Pharsalia was a little below the ordinary run ?–A. Yes; it is below the average. Q. And this item represents the actual expenditure taken from the books?—A. Yes. Q. Are the items for outfit and expenses put down also from actual expenditures 3– No ; they are estimates. Did you reckon there anything more than barrels packed out in mak- ing your statement for the settlement of the crew 2 There are more Sea barrels than packed barrels 7–A. Yes. Q. What is the difference—about 10 per cent. 2–A. Yes. Q. If barrel is exchanged for barrel do you make any allowance for 10 per cent.”—A. I see by my reply I said they are estimates. Does that apply to the Pharsalia Ž - Mr. DAVIES. That question related to the reason why you charged $450, when in the sample statement it only showed $415 as being ex- pended. - By Mr. Dana : Q. Did you mean to apply that to the Pharsalia 2–A. I did not. Q. Have you any alteration to make that would add to the cost with respect to the barrels? Might not the cost on them and interest on them be very fairly taken off?—A. If I was going to make up the account again, I would make it up more clearly in my own mind by taking off the average cost of running and vessel's gear, and then I would make a difference between sea and packed barrels. Those barrels had to go on board, and were part of the outfit, and the increased cost should be Considered. Then, again, I did not calculate anything for the barrels the bait was in. The bait was charged in net stock there with the bar- rels taken out—only the bait. As the bait was taken out, the barrels could be used for holding mackerel. g Q. On page 388 of your evidence you were asked : Q. You charge $8,500 for salt, for as many barrels at $1 a barrel; one-half of it would be profit, and that would leave $4,250 as profit 3–A. Yes. What does that mean 7–A. If I answered “yes,” I answered it with- Out thought, because there is no such profit as that on a barrel of salt. Q. What is about the rate of profit 3–A. I should not set down the profit on a barrel of Salt at more than 124 cents or 25 cents. Q. There are eight bushels to a hogshead º–A. Yes. Q. A bushel of salt is a struck measure, and does not hold so much as a bushel of other articles"—A. Yes. AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2669 Q. The following questions were put to you by Mr. Davies, on page 389 : - Q. I find from your statements that after the Washington Treaty was entered into, Mr. Steele withdrew his vessels from your shore fishery and concentrated all his efforts on the bay; am I correct in making that statement 3–A. In 1870 and 1871 he did not send any vessels to the bay. . Q. But in 1872 he commenced sending them to the bay ?—A. Yes. Q. And he has sent them there ever since %–A. Yes. Q. And he has since sent none to fish on your shore ?—A. No. * Q. Since 1872 he has sent none to fish on your shore, but has sent all his vessels to the bay ?—A. Yes. zº Have you any statement to show how Mr. Steele distributed his ves- sels 3 In 1858 how many vessels had he?—A. In 1858 he fitted 8 Schooners. Q. How were they distributed ?—A. All 8 schooners went ifito the bay, and one went to the shore one day. Q. In 1859 how many vessels had he?—A. He fitted 10; all went to the bay, and none to the shore. Q. In 1860?—A. Fitted 11; 8 to the bay, and three to the shore. Q. 1861 ?—A. Fitted 11; 7 to the bay, and 4 to the shore. Q. 1862?–A. Fitted 11; 5 went to the bay, 2 to the shore after they returned from the bay. Q. 1863?—A. Fitted 9; 6 went to the bay, 2 to the shore for one month and 24 days, after returning from the bay. Q. 1864?—A. Fitted 8; 8 went to the bay, none to the shore. Q. 1865?–A. Fitted 8; 8 went to the bay, none to the shore. Q. 1866?—A. Fitted 10; 10 went to the bay, none to the shore. Q. 1867 ?—A. Fitted 10; 9 went to the bay, 1 to the shore for 18 days after returning from the bay. - Q. 1868?–A. Fitted 10; 5 went to the bay, the rest went cod-fishing. Q. 1869?–A. Fitted 8; 6 went to the bay, none to the shore. Q. 1870?–A. Fitted 7; none went to the bay, 5 to the shore. Q. 1871?—A. Fitted 6; none went to the bay, 3 to the shore. & Q. Now comes the first year of the Washington Treaty. How many vessels did he fit in 1872?–A. 10 vessels; 2 went to the bay and 2 to the Shore, and the rest went cod-fishing. Q. 1873?–A. Fitted 8; 4 went to the bay, none to the shore, and 4 Codfishing. + Q. 1874?—A. Fitted 9; 3 went to the bay, the rest went codfishing. Q. 1875?—A. Fitted 9; 3 went to the bay. Q. 1876?–A. Fitted 13; 5 went to the bay. Q. Taking all those years together, do you see any striking difference in bay-fishing before and after 1872?–A. I do not. Q. You find that many years long before the Washington Treaty he did not send any vessels shore-fishing. Did he ever do much at shore- fishing %–A. No. - Q. Did he ever go into it fully ?—A. No. I don’t think he ever Owned a seiner. Q. Therefore he never tried seining on the shore?—A. No. A's He did not much enter into the mackerel-fishing on our shores 3– • N 0. - Q. His shore-mackerel business is no test of the general shore-mack- erel business?—A. No. * Q. You know that the word chartering sometimes means hiring and Sometimes letting. In speaking of chartering, did you mean to say that there were no cases of chartering vessels either in the form of letting 2670 T AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. or hiring vessels for fishing in Gloucester ?—A. There are cases of hiring vessels for fishing. - - Q. Who does it 3–A. It is generally done by outside vessels. Q. Who hires them 3–A. Sometimes a successful skipper will charter a vessel. 4. - - Q. You mean hire a vessel ?—A. Yes. - Q. Do Gloucester merchants, who are fitters-out and producers of fish, let their vessels?—A. No. Q. Do they hire vessels º–A. Some do, but it is very seldom done: there are merchants who do not own vessels. Q. The business of hiring vessels does not amount to anything im- portant. Do you mean to say there is no such thing 3–A. No. Q. What do you think is the average life of a fair fishing-vessel, not an extraordinarily good or unusually bad vessel ?—A. The average life of the vessels owned in Gloucester, in 1876, was 13.34 years. Q. Do you make that out from documents 3–A. From an annual pub- lication published by John S. E. Rogers, of Gloucester, Mass. Extract handed in as follows: ! The years are given in which 467 of the vessels in the list were built, the balance being boats of which no record is kept of their age. A comparison of them will indi- cate pretty nearly the depressions and prosperity of the fishing business during the last twenty-five years. The oldest vessel in the district is the schooner Magnet, of Annisquim, which was built in 1837; the next oldest is the schooner Gilde, of Manches- ter, built in 1839. The oldest vessel in Gloucester Harbor is the schooner Meteor, built in 1844. Each year since 1844 has furnished one or more of the vessels which mak up our list, as follows: • Year. No. 1 Year. No. Year. No. 1876 ------------------ 23 1864----------------- 5 i 1852----------------- 13 1875 ------------------ 38 1863----------------- 5 1851 ----------------- 13. 1874----------------- - 22 1862----------------- 2 1850 ----------------- 6 1873----------------- - 12 | 1861----------------- 1 1849 ----------------- 6 1872------------------ 13 | 1860 ----------------- 24 1848. --------------- - 2 1871 ------------------ 22 1859----------------- 22 1847 ---------------- * 7 1870 ----------------- - 28 1858 ----------------- 16 1846 ---------------- - 4 1869 ------------------ 30 | 1857 ---------------- - 9 1845 ----------------- 1 1868----------------- 29 1856 ----------------- 4 1844 -----------, ----- 1 1867 ------------------ 35 | 1855 ----------------- 5 | 1839 ----------------- 1. 1866 ------------------ 35 | 1854.---------------- 5 1837 ----------------- 1. 1865------------------ 14 1853 ----------------- 13 Q. Do you suppose it to be correct on that point %–A. Yes; for the compiler is very accurate in getting up statistics. Q. That is the average age of vessels existing at the time 3—A. Yes. I may explain that this book gives the year each vessel was built and the number of vessels built in each year down to 1876. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Do you mean that the average life of a vessel would be about 14 years 7–A. I think so. - By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Do you mean that it is as long as the vessels can go a trip º–A. Of the vessels in the fishing business, owned in Gloucester, the average age was a trifle under 14 years. By Mr. Dana : - Q. When a vessel is brought into Gloucester, not new, do the tables show where she was built 2—A. The table shows the year when and where built. Q. Some vessels are pretty old 7–A. One vessel in the table was built in 1837. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2671. Q. You have said that Mr. Steele never did any seining on the Amer- ican shore ?—A. I don’t think he ever did. • * Q. Seining has come into general vogue, has it not ?—A. Yes. Mr. DAVIES. The years I took were the years of the Reciprocity Treaty when there was no seining. By Mr. Dana : Q. As to insurance. Those merchants of Gloucester who own vessels. form a company; that is really a sort of annual company ?—A. A com- pany formed every year. Q. It closes up every year 3–A. Yes. g Q. The day it expires is 1st November 7—A. They have now organ- ized it to continue the year round. - Q. But there is a new company once a year 7—A. Yes. Q. All matters are closed up each year 2—A. Yes. Q. If the vessel do not return by a certain date a sum is placed in the Suspense account 3–A. Yes. * Q. They don’t actually pay premiums and receive dividends 2—A. No. Q. They give their notes, and at the end of the year there is an as- Sessment 3–A. They are assessed from time to time. Q. And at the end of the year, if necessary, there is an assessment 3– A. There is a final assessment. Q. There is no dividend paid 7––A. No, Q. The crew have nothing to do with insurances 3–A. No. - Q. Do you know how the owner is able to assign to each vessel the amount it ought to pay ?—A. Each vessel is charged with the amount for insurance paid out during the year to the company. Q. It is divided among different owners?—A. Each vessel is put in at a certain valuation, according to her age; the insurance amounts to so much, and each owner is charged with the insurance on that vessel. Q. They don’t actually pay out that insurance, do they 7–A. Yes; if it is not paid out in one season it is in another. They give their notes, and when there is an assessment on the insurance they pay the amount. Q. They are not charged on an ordinary note %—A. They give a pre- mium note. y By Mr. Davies: Q. If there is no assessment made, the premium note, I suppose, is re- turned to him 3–A.. I presume so. - Q. You have stated that the average age of fishing-vessels sailing out. of Gloucester is fourteen years 7–A. Yes. Q. Some of the vessels are, I suppose, twenty-five years old 7–A. Yes; some more than that. * Q. One nearly forty years old 7–A. Yes. Q. I see by this book that 22 vessels were built in 1876?–A. Yes. Q. 38 in 1875; 22 in 1874; 12 in 1873; 13 in 1872; 24 in 1860; 24 in 1859; 18 in 1858; 90 vessels were built previous to 1858, and would be be from 19 years old to 40 years?—A. Yes. Q. In regard to packing; in the statement you made up of Mr. Steele's vessels you told me you took the prices of his mackerel from the books?—A. Yes. Q. This statement you made up representing the voyages of 107 of Mr. Steele's vessels does not include packing 2—A. No. Q. You were asked a question about Mr. Steele's capital, and you. Said about one-half had been made by him in the sail-making business, and the other half since. Do you really know as a matter of fact what. Mr. Steele's capital is ?—A. I do not. - - 2672 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. It may be, for anything you know, $70,000, $80,000, or $90,000? —A. It may be. * - Q. You have no means of knowing what is his capital?—A. I have no means of knowing. Q. You really don't know what Mr. Steele's capital is, and you have no means of knowing?—A. I do not. When you asked me that question previously I was entirely unprepared, and I gave you an estimated value. Q. You now say you really don’t know what his capital is?—A. I do not ; only from my judgment, and from the common estimation of his Valuation in the city. I never went to the assessor's books to see what his property was valued at. W - Q. There is one answer which struck me as a little curious. In reply to a question by Mr. Dana you said the wear and tear of a vessel on your coast is less than the wear and tear of a vessel in Bay St. Law. rence?—A. I think so. • * * g -- & The reason you gave was because their harbors were so handy ?— A. Yes. - Q. Is it not in evidence before this Commission that the general fish- ing is from 15 to 100 miles off your coast?—A. I have referred to the Shore mackerel-fleet and the bay mackerel-fleet in my estimate. Q. Does not the American fleet fishing for mackerel off your shores fish from 15 to 100 miles off shore ?—A. Yes. Q. IS not Georges Bank one of the places where they fish?—A. Some- times, but very seldom there. Q. It is a very dangerous place?—A. Yes; in the winter season. Q. Don’t you know that the vessels. fishing for mackerel in Bay St. Lawrence fish within 50, 40, or 20 miles of the shore?—A. That may be. Q. Therefore your reason cannot be correct, when your vessels fishing off your coast are further away from the harbors than vessels in the bay ?—A. Off the New England coast there is more sea-room. You know that in Massachusetts Bay they have plenty of sea-room, while in the gulf they have not. Q. Do you mean to contend that the wear and tear of a vessel fishing off the American coast in November is not greater than the wear and tear of a vessel fishing in the Bay St. Lawrence in August?—A. Of course not; it is not a parallel case. Q. You mean only during the months they fish in the bay ?—A. And the same months on our shore. Q. But the months they fish off your shores when they cannot fish on our shores, the wear and tear is greater than during the fishing months in the gulf?—A. For sails and rigging the wear and tear in the gulf is just as much as fishing on our shores. - Q. How can that be 3—A. Because in the gulf you are using sails all the time. - Q. Take a vessel fishing mackerel in November off your coast, is not the Wear and tear of that vessel much greater than that of a mackerel- fishing vessel in the bay in August 3—A. I believe there was a severe gale down your coast in August. - ^ Q. Take July 3–A. Off our coast in November I should say it was decidedly rougher. - * Q. Should you say that the wear and tear of a vessel was decidedly greater on your coast 3—A.. I should say it was somewhat greater. Q. You are not a practical fisherman now and have not been so for a great many years?—A. No. - - - Q. You have no practical interest in ascertaining the prices?—A. No. Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2673 Q. Since you were here on Friday you have made up a statementºdif- fering somewhat in principle and also in some of its details from that you submitted on Friday?—A. Yes. Q. From whom did you get the statement that the fishing gear of a vessel cost about $45?–A. I made it up from my own idea of the things, and when I sat down and enumerated them I found they amounted to a good deal more than I had stated. Q. The first statement you made was a hap-hazard one. Had yout not taken the trouble to put down the items that made up $45%—A. I had not put down the items. I took the cost of a seiner in 1875, the fishing gear of which amounted to nearly $50. Q. ºn you took it from the highest cost we have had before us yet? —A. N.O. - - Q. Is it not the Centennial one 7–A. I allude to that one. Q. The cost of the vessel was submitted to the Centennial Commis- sioners?—A. Yes. " Q. In this statement you make the cost much higher ?—A. I do. Q. Tell me who did you consult with regard to the articles and prices since Friday ?—A. I consulted myself as regards the articles. Q. Who did you consult with ?—A. I did not consult with any one. Q. You made that up without consultation ?—A. I made it up from my recollection of the articles which went on board of a vessel. Q. Do you mean to say you made it up without consulting any prac- tical man?—A. I do. I asked in regard to the prices. • Q. whom did you consult?—A. With a Gloucester man who fits V6SSOIS. Q. What is his name 2—A. Mr. Wonson. Q. Of the prices, previous to consulting him, you had no knowledge?— A. I had knowledge of the prices in 1860, 1861, and 1862. Q. That was 14 years ago?—A. The basis on which Mr. Steele's. Voyages are made up is on an average for 19 years past. Q. What does this statement purport to be ; is it the average of a number of years?—A. It is an average of 17 years on which the Voyages of Mr. Steele's vessels were based. A & I thought it explained the mackerel fishery at the present time?— • N O. : Q. Have you got a price-list for each of the seventeen years, the prices of which Mr. Wonson gave you ?—A. No. Q. He guessed the average price for seventeen years of each of those articles, or was it arrived at by a comparison of actual figures?—A. I knew the prices of those articles, according to my recollection, in 1860, 1861, and 1862. I compared the prices of those years with the prices In OW, to get at my estimate. Q. I speak in regard to your conversation with Mr. Wonson. Did he remember the prices of each of the articles during the seventeere years?—A. Of course not. Q. Nor could you?—A. Of course not. Q. Therefore, if neither of you could recollect the prices, how could you make up the statement º–A. I made it up according to the best of my judgment. Q. The value of that would consist in the means of knowing. You . not possess price-lists for each year to ascertain the amount 3–A. O. Q. The second statement is $20 over the former statement 7–A. Yes. Q. And that estimate was submitted to the Centennial Commis- 168 F W2674 - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. sion ?–A. $50 for a seiner, not for a gulf fisherman. Mackerel lines were an expense, and I did not take any account of them in the Seiner. Q. If you put half a dozen adze on board, will they not be any good at the end of the season 3––A. Yes, but they would not be worth so much, and they would not all come back. - Q. This statement is made up to the best of your judgment 3–A. Yes, I think you will find the facts warrant me in saying that it is far below the cost of those articles during seventeen years. Q. It is fourteen years since you have been engaged in the business %–– A. I know that the prices since I left the business have been a great deal higher. Q. You cannot pretend to claim for your evidence on this point the Same value as that of a practical man in business?——A. Of course not. Q. You would not have known how to make up the statement except for Mr. Wonson 3—A. I would, except the prices. , - Q. You could not get the prices without Mr. Wonson 3—A. I could not get the prices to-day. I had the prices for 1860, 1861, and 1862 in my mind. Q. Those prices would not give you the average for seventeen years 3–A. It would give the commencement. Q. What was the price of buckets in 1872?—A. 25 cents apiece. Q. You put them down in the statement at $3 a dozen 7–A. Yes. Q. This other statement you have made up is also different from the one you had put in 2—A. Yes. & Q. Why did you make it different 2–A. Because that is the actual am Ount. - Q. The expenditure on what vessel does it represent 2—A. It repre- Sents any vessel. i Q. It is not an actual representation of any given vessel ?—A. Of ‘Course not. & Q. It is a supposititious statement?—A. You may call it so. Q. I want to know whether you submit that to the Commission as a statement of actual expenditure incurred on a given vessel, or as a Sup- posititious statement 7–A. Not for any given vessel, but I submit it as being, if anything, below the actual expenditure for any vessel running out of Gloucester. Q. What you suppose to be below 7–A. I think it is. Q. You don’t pretend to submit it as having been copied out of the accounts of any vessel ?—A. No ; it cannot be done. Q. It was not taken from any given vessel ?—A. No. Q. Nor from any practical man’s accounts º—A. No. Q. It was made up out of your own head º–A. Yes, the same as any one estimating would make it up. Q. The vessel’s expense account which you submitted, you explained you know nothing about, but that it was handed in by you from Mr. Procter 2—A. That is all. I know nothing about it. Q. Mr. Procter was examined here ?–A. Yes. By Mr. Whiteway: Q. Turn to page 375 of your evidence, and you will find the following under the head of Recapitulation : Trawl gear -------------------------------------, ----------- ------...--- $1,023 25 Vessel's expense account.------------------------------------------------ 1,823 85 Provisions, &c.---------------------------------------------------------- 1,426 03 General charges.----------- * tº gº tº ſº, º mº m me tº es e º sº nº gº ºn sº º sº se wº is m º ºs ºs º ºs º gº ºn tº as a s we as an an * * * * * 1, 135 50 *===s=== Total cost of running.----------------- * sº & ºn A tº gº tº ºt, º ºs & ------- - - - - - - - - - 5,408 63 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2675 Do I understand that is the exact annual charge of a vessel during 302 days she was running 3—A.. I do. - Q. Under the miscellaneous charges, amounting to $1,135.50, there is an item, 200 tons ice, $600. Do you mean to say that a vessel engaged fishing will use 200 tons ice in 302 days?—A. Yes. Q. Can you show me in your trip-book any such cases? Turn up the IPharsalia.—A. That was a Grand Bank trip after Grand Bank codfish. This is a trip after fresh halibut. The cases are not parallel. Q. Take a fresh-fish trawler and show me a consumption of 200 tons of ice in 302 days.—A. Here are the items for the schooner Marathon: 25 tons of ice, April to May, 1874; 23 tons, May 6 to June 14; 28 tons, June 22 to July 31; 30 tons, August 4 to September 12; 15 tons, De- cember and January; total, 131 tons. Probably there are other vessels that had more. Q. That is the highest quantity you can find 7–A. No doubt I can find a parallel case to that in the statement, because it is common. It depends on how successful the vessel is in taking fish as to how much ice is used. It is not an extraordinary occurrence to use 200 tons of ice a year. - By Mr. Davies: Q. I understood you to say that the abstracts you put in are correct?— A. After I had prepared the abstracts, to make sure they were correct I spent almost as much time in Verifying them as I had in making them out. They agree within four cents. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. In regard to bait used in mackerel-fishing; I suppose the quantity of fish taken is not generally an exact indication of the quantity of bait used ?–A. No. Sometimes they will throw 50 or 75 barrels of bait and not get 20 barrels of mackerel. Q. So it need excite no wonder that a good deal of bait had been used With a small catch 3–A. No. ſRecapitulation of foregoing voyages, showing in condensed form the whole totals from 1858 to 1877; showing time employed in cod and halibut fishin Summary of the voyages made by the fishing-vé88els of George Steele. and Gulf of St. Lawrence mackerel fishery, with amount of catch, value, &c. g, and American shore P; gº. QP º tº * &2 n * GE) f . pºst 3 gº s" --> #| # | # | 3 | | | | 3 | # | 3 | # # # # # #3, #3 | Remarks. tº ºrcs P- # 3 .# £8 § * sº | jº § ; : Ps * - -ºš º . . . . c. 3 º: ; ; $– to 3 2 . . . . . $- - St. 5 § § 1 - & 3.3 k- $2 *** #- & ;3| J3 | 3a ##| | Eº sº; 8 . . ; ... g . . . rº; 9 || 5.3 sº * E. o 3 – 23 || 23 . Tº Hands em- 2.3| *- : * Gº Sºl 3 + º §§ q) ºr , Q c || 9 ap, Ö GL) *: 3 - Q & 3 ; 5: loved. dº C gº 3 * a to .#3 º ºs ºn 3 5: ; ; $– | "; , ; Ps y-l * +--> $—t O - jº º on d) Si- --> ploy Year |##| g : º + 3 |$ 3.3| 3: # 3 || 3: § 5 ' ||37 || 8 g rºd & 3 a 3 #5 3 # 3 ; : ‘F |—: 3.3| = 3 £3. * } {{##| #3 | # ຠ##| |##| 3 || 3 §: Gº § E 3 o ## ##| || 3 || 3 || - Prs | g 3 on O #: 3 § 3 ; 3. *—t 5 § {2 CH > 3; 3 º # 6 ºn 33 an º ºn 5 Sh o dº is . Q É QD + gº 3. ºf 5 || 5 || || 3 Q 3 || 2: ... - 3 || 3 || - *-4 * ". Tº dº r: º, ø F § ch £3| #F | 3 | # 33 = | # #| # 3 # | | | 3 | # #3 # ### #:# |3| 3 |## e 3 || $4 $– º c T. E. 3 Tº: s =} Q} c • F-4 c $– Cl) §: 3 $–4 d5 tº 3 : + r: cº 2, C ºr Ö O zºbé- ſº |- H - z, sq É- || 2 | ºb -> F. Ǻ :* | * * * | 3 || 3 || 3 - ...] Mos, Ds. MOs. Ds. Mos. DS Alſos, Ds 1858 ...| 7 31 7315, 170 68] $6,722 82 8 2, 1094;23, 159 37 33 22#10, 715 58| 1 79 $277 62 $94 08 5 $41,607 67 $6,542 71|$17, 532 48| 8 9. 14.5 1859 8] 33 9| 20,037 59 9,026 11 10| 1,923 || 24, 727 61 42 13 10,457 4t|--|--|- - - - -.] ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 22 44; 765 20 5, 798 16, 19,483 52 10| 9. 14.5 1860 - || 9 42 15 21,088 18 8, 972 76 8, 1,866; 20, 295 91 33 18 9, 178 75|| 3 7 24|1,098}| 6,824 31, 3,334 20, 80 7| 48,208 40 5,236 98 || 21,485 71 11 9. 14.5 1861 ...| 9 55 3 19,989 75|| 8,708 33 7| 1,809 || 10,446 87. 22 3 4, 469 73| 4 6 14| 6884| 3,481 42 1, 528 96| 81 20 33,98 04 4, 504 00 14,707 02 11| 9. 14.6 1862 8 59 8 32,074 32 14, 460 22 5| 1,360+ 10,363 77| 14 16 4, 719 50 2. 2 27, 239 1,267 99 556 73| 76 21 43, 706 08 4, 233 18| 19, 736 45 9. 9. 14.2 1863 - 9| 39 14|| 34, 416 39 15,484 92 6, 2,654 28, 784 69| 20 7| 13,346 39 2. 1 24 121 861 86 385 17| 61 15 64,062 94 5, 629 98 || 29, 216 48 9| 9. 14.2 1864 8] 37 6. 32,711 49| 15, 122 36 8|4, 319 52, 751 83 27 25, 22,010 83|----|- - - - - -]. -----|---...--...--...-- 65 1ſ 85, 463 32 11, 196 94| 37, 133 19 8, 9.1. 14.5 1865 t| 26 24|48, 142 00 22, 403 83 8 4, 246%| 54, 713 24 34 9| 25, 267 93... --|- - - - - - - - - - - -|.........|. - ... . . . . . 61 3| 102,855 64 7, 511 7%| 47,671 76; 8 9. 1, 14.5 1866 - 9| 36 6 44, 579 18, 19,952 97 10 3,914 || 60, 108 56 43 9| 26, 727 79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * 79 15| 104,687 74 11,326 2: 46,680 76. 10 9.4| 14.8 1867 ... 10| 52 9| 48,860 24, 21,456 27 9| 2, 5263. 35, 667 11 34 13 15, 970 47| 1 18| 23 || 235 03 82 37| 87 10| 84,762 38 9,744 16. 37, 509 11 10| 9.4, 14.8 1868 10| 66 6 71,543 22 32,327 30 5 1, 712}| 13, 437 01 17 16| 5, 276 94|--|--|--....|.-----|- - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . 83 22 84,980 23 9,771 75 37,604 24|10| 9.4| 14.8 1869 8| 48 21| 60,777 09| 26, 564 49 6|| 105 || 19, 133 87. 19 3| 7,498 88 - - - -|- - - - - , |.-----| - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . 57 24 79,910 96 11, 784 2: 34,063 37 8, 9.5, 15. 1870 - 3| 37 26, 36,689 00 15,338 06.--..........|.......... [......|.......... 5 17 181, 702 |17,045 71 7, 511 79| 55 14| 53, 734 71| 8,035 01' 22, 849 85| 7 9.5 15. 1871 3| 35 17| 31, 848 221 13,658 36|......|.......l..........|...... [.......... 3| 14 91,076 9,427 52 4, 204 10 49 26 41,275 74 5,550 82| 17,862 46 6, 9.5 15.1 1872 - 7| 56 9| 51,857 09| 23, 447 86 2 : 713%. 5,861 62 5 5| 2,668 62] 2 7 13 368 3, 680 34 1, 560 36|| 68 27. 61, 401 05 6,047 37| 27,676 84|10| 10.2] 16.1 1873 - 8] 57 11| 60,221 69| 27, 659 71 4, 1,425 || 14,906 61| 13 8 6,423 19|- - - -] ......|...... [...... . . . - - - - - - - - - 70 19| 74, 128 30 5,962 5( 34,082 90 8, 10, 1] 15, 1 1874 § 63 15 66,645 11| 29,628 37 3, 1,305 || 8, 163 49 11 25; 3,389 41|....|......|......|.........|......... 75 10| 74,807 60 8,773 04| 33,017 78 9, 10.2] 15.6 1875 -- 9 61 27| 60,967 44| 26,653 28 3. 816 || 11, 571 84| 9 16| 5, 187 00|-- ... [...... [...... [...... . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 13| 72, 539 28 8, 858 72 31, 840 28 9| 10. 6 15.6 1876 ... 10| 74 11| 55,897 25 26,938 65 5| 840 || 9, 739 46 17 21 4,081 61|--|--|...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .----. 92 2 65,636, 71. 11, 596 19: 27,020 26 13 10.5. 16. 19 yrs. 155 915 .41813, 515 93360, 526 67| 10733,645 |403,832 86400 29.177,390 03] 23: 58 285, 3943|43, 101 80,19,257 761, 369 11,262,431, 29.146, 1594 |558, 13590|174| 180.5 283.4 108 15 Time fit- Time fit- 75 1 268 14 Time fitting Average, 9.1 vessels AV |——— ting. ting. — —— vessels. yearly. Average, 9.5 8, 21 1,023 19 476 1, 637 15: hands fishing; 15 y - hands mackereling. “The above summary of the voyages made by George Steele's vessels is explained as follows: The ‘time employed' is the actual time employed from the time she sailed on her first voyage until she returned for the last time before refitting for mackerel fishing or for hauling up at the end of the season. Six weeks’ additional time should be added for time spent in fitting and unfitting the vessels for the whole season—each year three weeks each for each kind of fishing, cod-fishing and mackereling. “The Whole value of the vessels' catch is called the “gross stock,' from which is taken the ‘stock expenses,’ such as ice, bait, and the expenses attending th e the hands of the fishermen in hauling their lines, and one-fourth of one per cent. of the gross stock for the widow and orphan fund, all of which are more clearly shown in a trip settlement of a mackerel voyage.” em, ‘nippers' for ; oissIWWoo KääHSIA IHI. Io qavav 21.9% N. Schooner Austerlitz, [Tonnage, 94ģ$ tons; average number of hands fishing, 8; mackerelin8.14.]ſ rotº ,, ， :§ §.?ºº qo !£', 'C'º •.º.ºffſ+ ）;ſ',•? ##ŽĖ Į šĚ Ě Ė Ė Ė Į šĚ. | #§§§§ § ... | $3 | $|× ºg „№ſ# ?§‘5 5E ſº º.ſ. O©± &= 3→± „№ſo £©$-） Years.p4 +€.āſ:5to & ‘º .Eſ & §pu P3 rº CNR GN. - GNR dº # +5 st GN. "A.19 -USpſ [9.I.9XIogul 9 Jo U S UI tº o W U. GD }=3 $3 I (9 UCII ſ 9 UCII *$ſ69 K. 'quango s[or -Igg Jo Jøquin N. 'eſt?UIS S.I.98S9.A. 'uo) go Jo enløA ‘9.18LIS S.Lesse A 'uoqeo Jo enſeA •orens S.IQSSøA. *Uſo]?0 JO 9mTBA ‘ĀIQUISg ºnqſſeuſ **qu'àngo s[9.1 -IBq Jo Jequin NI -US g [910xſobut JO JIn 9 UT OUTIL -T.I.9 UIL eouſe.I.Agr I "qS put poo II [:āUȚIºJºx{0'eur spugų gI $3 uſqsg spūgų 6 % su 04 00I-QI Lç'e3euIu0ļ AøN] 'waqwmny ſouoðſſos "NOISSIWWOO XXIGIHSIGI CIHL (HO CI&IWAAW G893 Schooner Prairie Flower. [[Old tonnage, about 96 tons; 15 hands mackereling.]] ---- ��? ！,��‘S 8.）;&+�† 2.&！ä� & $:3£± 5 #§-ſë<>£È §§Š+3Q£ rº „Eſ†ē§±3 ± ---+£5）?cae5ĂË、。（§cae 8£Q©öğ §o Ē©#Þ>€+º zaÞ-Þ- A1 Mos... | DaysMos.JMos. | Days.► - 1859.---------' ~ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •-------|--------|--------|-----√ √ √∞ √æ ø § ø œ • • • • • • • •28159 | $2, 12283 .ș936 41 |--------|--------• æ ææ æ æ ， • • • • • • • • • • • • • • § €） → : & æ æºg æ æ ， * ± • �· Schooner St. Cloud. - {· [ About 120 tons; 17 hands mackereling.]* 1859.-----§ w • * * * * *） ≤ ≥ ≡ ≈ ≠ ≤ ∞ → • • • • • • • ►►！ ± • №m dae （ º ， ， ， • • • • I • • • æ， æ æ – • ’ | w wę æ æ æ§ ø œ œ • ! * * *- - - - - - -321199 | $2,556 93 | $1,029 461.---.---|--------|----------|------------|---------� 2 trips.• -- 1860----------------------------• • • • • • I • • • • • • • • fh = = = = = = = = ſ] * * * * * =• • • ► | * • • • • • •=. № • •528397 | 3,976 43 | 1,922 21 | .-.-.-.-. | .-.-.-.-.-. | .-.-.-.-.-.-.-. | .-.-.-.-.-.-∞ → • § 1 • • • • • • • • • • 919 | 596 | 6,533 36 | 2,951 67 Schooner Samantha C. Steele. [About 120 tòns; 17 hands mackereling.] . 1861-----------------æ， ， ， ） − √≠ ≤ ∞, ∞; ∞， ∞， ∞） × ± • • • • • • ！！ ！！ ！！ ） ■ ■ ■• • ¡ e ºs se ae → • • • *| * • • • • • • • • •|• • • • • • • æ æ ，|ºl········161 || $716 47|$300 11|2|• • • • • • • • •|154 || $1, 149 04|$569 05 98.9% NOISSINIWIOO X?IGIHSI H (H HI, HO CISIWAAW Schoomer Charles Cam'roll. Old tonnage, 909-95 tons; new tonnage, 5864-100 tons.– [Average number of hands cod and halibut fishing, 9; mackereling, 14.]] Years. one-half of net gross stock. stock. Time in cod and halibut fishing. . Value of catch; Vessel's share ; Time in Gulf of St. Lawrence, mackerel fish- ing. Number of bar- rels caught. Value of catch. Wessel's share or Crew's share. i- sh or e mackerel fish- IIlg. Amer ime in C, a, Il T Number of bar- rels caught. • Value of catch. Wessel or Crew's share. 1861, ... 1862. - _ _ ！ ± • • • • • • • • • • • • • ►• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ► ► ► ► ► ► w 1863.----------------** --> *， *） ）， œ • • • • •• ， ſae ， ， ， ， ， ） æ æ æ æ）ș • • • • 1864. ----------�■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • • •∞ √∞ → • §æ æ ， æ Œ œ § → · § æ æ æ æ Œ œ • • • • • • 1865.---------------∞ √≠ √æ æ ææ æ ， æ æ æ ææ■ ■ * • • • ••■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • • • • • 1866.---------------tº = ∞ → ← → • • • • • • • • • • • •is w • æ æ æ æ æ ſºº • • • 1867.---------------------------∞ → ← → • § ©ſae sae - ， ） → • • • • ！ » 1868-----------£ € ← → ← → • ，■ ■ æ æ , æ æ ø • • • • § € © ®*， ， æ æ æææ æ ， æ æ ææ æ æ æ ææ 1869......∞ √æ æ æ ， -！----- - - - - - - - - - - -∞ √≠ ≤ ≤ ≤ ≤ ≥ ≡ ≈me œ • • • • • • • • • 1875. ... • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • æ æ ， æ æ ， æ æ • • • • • ►s æ æ ， æ æ æ • • = = ≠ ≤ ≥ æ, æ æ æ ， æ ææ æ ， æ， æ æ æ æ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■• • • • • • • •ą ）. № ！！ ！！ �■ ■ • • • • • • • æ-， ， ， ） es es œ œ • • • • • • • №-*， ， ∈→ ← → ← → ← → • • •• • ， ， ， ）; • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • * * * * * → ← → • •æ, ， ، ، ، ، ، ، = æ æ æ æ*** *） ≤ ∞， ∞， ∞， ∞ √≠ √æ æ æ æ æ ¡ ¿ $¢ £ © ®）， ſae t- & æ æ æ ， æ æ→ ∞， ∞; ∞ -> ∞， ∞; ∞， ∞）.£s we • • • •∞ ºm § © ® ° * * * *） ） * → → → §æ ：） ）， º ſº Mos. 9 | 2,401 42 4,602 72 2 | 5, 710 35 7,953 40 7,018 79 4,480 22 6,006 22 7, 214 80 2 | 7,550 66 7,473 26 6,517 45 9,009 17 8, 664 46 4, 811 86 4 | 5,704 47 2, 128 50 2,325 95 ~g ºn to ec to oo - or ºn tº. He coco co ºr c> }=l Sº s º, tú) tº tº º, Nº Cº F-4 Nº Co $1, 802 1, 278 1,921 3, 566 5, 780 7, 127 5, 852 2, 759 3, 213 3, 101 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • * • • • • • * • • • • • • • • • °°°°°°șišģ Hº-1 c Co 97, 024 73 | 43,027 98 36, 399 "NOISSIWIWIOO XXIGHEISIBI HEIJ, HO CIXIWAAW J.89% Šchooner Madame iſoland. [62 39-100 tons, 10 hands fishing ; 15 hands mackereling.] Number of bar- rels caught. Value of catch. Wessel's share. can s h or e mackerel fish- Time in Ameri- ery. §. ±！！ ！5 o Ē & ſº 5 taš Źº $3, 107 47 5,362 90 7, 836 86 6,349 48 6, 428 71 5, 756 87 4, 156 16 3,366 54 $1,347 76 2,524 45 3, 224 45 2,899 25 2, 792 46 2,464 52 , 1, 668 73 1, 191 74 sæ æ ， æ æ «» ★ → • • • • • • • & æ Œ œ * ±e și 229 „H 3 cae © º+-+ Q Q9 |E cae Þ> ````šķiği öğ’ • • • • • • • • • • • • • → ← → ← → • • • • • • • • • • § € œ • • • • • • • Years. ime in co halibut fishery. T d and Value of catch. Wessel's share. Time in Gulf of St. Lawrence mackerel fish- ery. 1860-----···---···---···---···---···---···· 1861---------------------------------------- }-\ }-A SC CO &Q cºo c OO Gº Hº Hº Yº Hº Lº QJY ºn $1, 051 53 3, 245 57 5,387 30 5, 507 95 * 4, 443 23 8, 150 35 1, 450 48 5, 087 13 4, 662 15 5,471 82 3,450 11 7, 171 32 10, 197 07 12, 010 79 10, 139 11 8, 353 87 6,562 59 $494 76 1, 467 38 2,378 37 2, 466 86 2,027 17 3, 742 43 593 39 2, 213 01 1,973 90 2, 377 56 1, 319 08 3,044 79 4, 781 08 5, 886 22 4,418 13 3,574 15 2, 639 23 }=\ }=\ Cº) 102,342 37 45, 397 51 42, 364 99 18, 113 36 3,683 67 1,651 71 8896 "NOISSIWWOO KAGIHSIGI IHL IO (IAVAw Schooner Everett Steele. [70-54-100 tons. Average, 10 hands codfishing; 16 hands mackereling.] Years. d and ime in co Ti halibut fishery. Value of catch. Vessel's share. Gulf of Lawrence mackerel fish- ery. ime in St. T Number of bar- rels caught. Value of catch. Vessel's share. Time in Ameri- can shore mack- erel fishing. Number of bar- rels caught. " Value of catch. Vessel's share. 1865. - - - -e， º ） • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1866. . . . . .£ © ® ° æ æ ， æ æ æ • • • • • • ► • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1867.-----------• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ！= √+ √æ æ ， æ æ æ 1875.------------------------------- ---- 1876- ----------• ！ ） ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ & ſae ， ， ， ， ） → Thirteen years.----- - - - ------.--. Mos. 2 }* }-4 "Hºl. Sº CD - Gº & Cº ºt ºr º) cº º tº Cºb | *C €+ſząÞ-Þ>€HZÞÞ> Mos. | DaysMo8. || Days.Mos. | Days 1866------------------------------∞ √æ æ ， … … • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •420616 || $9, 501 76 | $4,204 42 |------|------|------|------.---...|.......... 1867.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. | 4 || 25 || $6, 563 55 || $2,904 99 || 3 | 16 | 467 | 8,632 72 | 5,057 58 || ......|......• • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • 1868.---------------------------------------------| 108 | 15, 676 847, 403 19 |----- | .-----|--------|--------• • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • •- - - - - -| - - • • • • ! - - - - - - | - - - - -• • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • 1869----------------• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •..... | 5 || 28 || 8,428 23 | 3,809 8326239 | 4,626 98 | 2,076 45 || ......|......|......- - - - - -• ！， --★ → ← → ← • - - - - - - - - - 1870.----------------• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •● ● ● wae - - -• • • • •102 | 11,092 034, 899 54 | -.-.-.-.- | ------|----• • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • 1 • • • • • • I • • • • • • I - - - • • • • • • • • • 1. æ æ æ - - - - - - - 1871------------------------------• • • • § € ± • • • - - - - -2334, 117 831, 878 37 |-----. |------|----• • • • • • • • • • • •- - - - - - ， ， ， ， ， , ， ， ） → • • • • •65 | 484 || $3,752 51 || $1, 637 33 1872. - - - - -• • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ， ， ， ） → • • • • • • • • • • • № ſe * • • • •181, 227 87571 48 | .-.-.-.-. | .-.-.---|--• • • • → ← → • • • • • • • •----|------------|------|------|------|------• • • • • • ¡ ¿ - ， -， … • • • • • Total ------------------------• • • • • • • • • • • ••3424 | 47, 106 35 || 21, 467 401012 | 1,322 || 22, 761 46 | 11, 338 4565 | 4843,752 51 | 1,637 33 *IO CIHWAAW I69% "NOISSIWWIOO X3[GIHSIAH (HHI, [65 86-100 tons. 11 hands fishing ; 17 hands mackereling. Schooner Oliver Eldridge. Went ashore at Magdalen Islands, August 24, 1873.] -*• !p=* ÄËſ#??# re ab•‘E Èș|-ºğ} . H#• 5.E.5£Þ>€HŹÞÞ±ſząÞ>Þ> Mos. | Days.-Mos. | Days.Mos. | Days 1872--------------------w • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •10 | 16 || $15,997 40 || $7,551 39 || ......* • * • • • • • • • • • • • • ! «» ， ， ， • • • •• • • • ! • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • T • • • • → • • • • • • • • H • • • • • •• • ► ► ► • H • • • • •• • • • • 1873.-------------------！» «№ e- → • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •«• • • • •6128, 430 463,905 71114225 | $2, 048 54$688 56 |------|------|------|--------∞ √æ æ æ ¡ • • • • • • • • • • 1874---------------• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • -∞ → • •4204332, 785 851, 135 32 |------|-----. | .-----|------• • • • • • ! • • • • • • • • • • 1875.------------------------• • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • •-- «… • •536, 084 862,678 672279263,543 661, 564 05 | .-.-.-.-. | .-.-.-.-.• • • • • I • • • • • • •• • • œ • I • • • • • • • • • • 1876 ------------------------------------------. --. | 5 | 12 | 3,591 90 | 1,378 07 | 3 | 13 | 231 | 2,410 09 | 1,057 84 || ......|......|......|.......• • • • • + • • • • • • • • • • Total -------------------------.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. | 27 | 13 | 34, 104 62 || 15, 513 84 | 12 | 14 | 1, 115 | 10, 788 14 | 4,440 77 || ......|......|......• • • • • • • • • • • • r1 • • • • • •• • • • 2692 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 0€ 1.81%9ý † 31. ‘IŞ9&I6I8- - - - - - - - - - - -| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -≡ ≈ ≠ ≤ ≤ ∞ ſ） → ∞， ∞; ∞ ）© ： • • ！！ ！!~ ae → • ， ！• • • • • •9! 8I [‘spuºgų „I'3ū|(910x108.JN "SUIO! 69] 'uſm0489wpp 49，00ųoŞ Ź6 IĘI ‘3 | 60 098 %$g3983 || gL& 0€）, ºg I | #9 #90%; | €Igg |----------------● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●s = æ æ ， ， ， ، ، ، ، ، ، • • • •[8ļ0J, æ ææ æ Œ œ ·-------|------------|--------|------|------| ſg§§§99 886|9839------------------------------------------------gigt ·········---··········· | ·······|······|·····8£ 800 ſĮ0 1693&6∞ √≠ ≤ ∞ → • • • • c） * * *） ）， ±， 0） ） ） *） ≤§ ø œ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •91,8 ſ 69 668gº 86'ſ '&Ț888I8I, 396 ſſ! gº!!0! | 31g |-----Œ œ œ œ • § € £ © ® =ų №. ！！ es së& *） ≤ ∞ √∞ √© √æ • • • • • • • • ►a e， ， º， ø œ œ • • • • ！= s† 18I ::::::::::::|::::::::::::|:::::---|------******| 99 09g ‘8$ | $3 099 ‘LĖ | 9g |-----------------------------------------¿ № ！！ ） ■ ■ ■818 I 88 383 ‘IŞ | #8 999 '&$ | #7080Ig |------------|------------|------|-----e» ， «» ）， œ œ •∞ √∞ √≠ ≤ ∞ √∞ √§ © ® = * * * * = ∞ → → → ← → ← → ← → • • • • • • • • • • •∞ √≠ ≤ ≥ ± − ×&L8L "Sfiſoq | '80ȚIIºsfioCT|| ‘80III4 • -H șŠ#3©-Ęșși§§� ſt?！5. E#5 #%E”È,Ę 9.GD·þTº Eae§： < º.9.CDĒ ~,añºO$ $ÞË Eo㺩Ē Ē“ }}=+>ČO}+»Þ3 *ÁIętąsg [0，19x{oguI 9JOUȚs ū80țJ0Uu WÉ.©$2,8,Ēģ?É.©Ē©‘SJB9A. ğš | ſg | §§§£}É?. �Þº{{}}º 5 $,çºÞºÈ È ['syſūſeg puſēIÐ UIo Șuțų.sgpoo spuſeq đI { $tmp[0.10}{0'eur 03 ‘spuſeEI ’suo4 00I-9& gſ. '03euIUOL] ('&SI UIĘ qųãmogſ) '.wp№dutº I, qųfiņwyſ (91100ųoŞ AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 2693 * ·66 Tg8 '&$ | 6Ť g03'）,'$ | 9I|×|-→ ∞, ∞， ∞; ∞• • • • • • æ Œ œ • • ► ►• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •---------------91.gI [ '3ūſų sg ‘II ‘spuſe EI ºsu04 00I-89 IL ‘ø3euIUOL] (ºgſ.SI ‘IºquI000CI ‘AA9N) - ºſnowwoȚII „ſºwo0qoS IL 9ț6$ºg LT& '&$ | 36I6I8«» ， ， ， ， ， ， ， ， ， ， ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، = = = =§ ， ， ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ،• • • • • • • • • • • •------------- 9131 ["Spureq SI ‘īſuļ(0.10}{08/WI ‘SUO4·001-02, L3] -(‘91.8I UȚ AA9N) 'wpOwnGI “F’ ‘ET „lºw00ųoŞ 80 ETT ‘3 | 88 g06 ‘$ | №gg0Ț | 96g 103 ‘8 || 98 gTE ‘6I | Ig | 03 Įſ 093,00 £18,899I8gį; 68),}Þ6 6g3|×9I#• • • • • • • • • •- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -！， ， ， ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ،9! 8I !,6 č98 ‘IĘ | 88 &60 ‘ſſ | 993† & | &gg fºg ºg | ga Ogg ºg | g | | g ||• • • • • • • • • • • • •）; ∞, ∞; ∞, ∞; ∞, ∞;، ، ، ، ، ،∞, ∞, ∞） • • • • ș.- - - - - - -�■ ■ ■ • • • •94,8|| ºđȚIą øūO{{ × × × ± • • • ► s---|------------|--------|------|------T8 ſº I ºff; || 69 ggg ‘6$ | 3II• ， ， æ æ Œ œ œ • → =• • → • ， ！�■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ſae ſae ae → ∞, ∞; ∞, ∞, ∞; ∞,«» «» ， ، ، ، ، ، ، ،#L8I 'SfiņCT | '80Aſ'SfiſoCT | *SoIII H 3| 3„Źcò-}şșbº |-3I %ÈſșĚ | ģēĘ%ĒÈğ $2,CD&3ĒģEº9.CDg *©*ae �*，o*= *e ºÁIQUȚsg (0，9x10'eu eIOĮs ueo! TºurſŹ.?đã##?Ž?ŠŤ‘SIB9A. •ŞY)}}È Èğ § 5;ºſº}}£. № Š©ję º51 E 5Šo$ º ●Þº§§ȘO H=}}■ *-Þº§ 8 •* g）,§ 33�Nº №ſ Œà�ș+ºu ['3ūțIÐI9x{0'etų spureq gI ， 3ūſųsų spūgų II （001-eſ, 89 ‘938TIUIOL] ('g1ST “IºqūI909CI ‘AA0N) ºù0ņ0.00III wºwo0ųoŞ 2694 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. • «» ， ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، ، †), 869$ g9 16）. “IË | 13 ----------------------------------------gigt ['U'Inqºlī ļou pſp pure '91.8I '&I IĻIſſy 8931099 Joſ pºſſes “õuțqsgpoo spū'eq 6 ºsuoſ 001-96 ſ.] '060ņ0.00Ş „lºw00ųoŞ 06 0ý8$08 ý88$89Ț6I63 983; 'IĘ | 81, †6I'&$ | 66898g |------∞ → ← → ← → • T • • → ← → ← →∞ → ∞, ∞; ∞, ∞; ∞, ∞; ∞， ∞; ∞-|------|----------------------------------------gigi 'SfiņCI | '80JÄT'0/0ųS Qwſpaſ l'SfiņCI | '80ȚII'SfiņQT|| ‘80ȚII <ſ<ſz | " . HÈ<ſ<ſſzH§ +3CDÖſſº}=b§ +3© ºpCO}++）SIĘº X. ©©№ o5. º.þ>Œœ©ſi o3; 3 QCaeſ©#3 ±ºſºÚq ++) .– 5’Esº$9Úq F#3±− H+ →Eº§3|-Jº ºu §9eº-EºE©e-+-ÞºCD →&+~） }=3€.și ºÞº 5±©ș+≡#|#| 5È&$'）; $p�ğ | # # #.ŞºÞº}ș’8 €.çº！# Ē. ['eqnO Įo qS800 uo ºgLSI ‘ÁIemūre p qsO'I „“øJOĻs įgo, spuſeq 9I 9JĮm3 uļ ȘuțIÐIÐyſogtu spuſeq. 6I ºsu04 00I-6Ť OL] ‘91994Ş 96.000£) lºu00ųoŞ g9 680 ‘IĘ 68 ſig '&# 833 ÞI ·|6 t ← → ← →|··· • æ æ æ ，• • • œ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •----------------gigt ["spuſeų ȘI '8ūOļ 001-ſ6 96] ('92.8\ u\ AA9N) ‘900;T \\n0wmfinėſ „ſowo0ųOS， Schooner Howard Steele. [60 37-100 tons. Average hands fishing, 10; hands mackereling, 14 J * G dº #9, . . . ā; # cº § rº º ‘5 Cö : .d & 'º'; # - # :- f # .# +-> # : P. 3. rº º Years. Q CE; C º 5 #3 ‘5's, Q #. American shore mackerel fishery. 3+: ‘5 ºn A £3 || 3: ‘s ºn - gå g $ º 㺠# Ç É % #: 'º 3 #3 & 5 ‘º 3 H P- P- E- 2. - P- Mos. |Days Mos. |Days 1872-----------------------------------------------. 6 $2,800 94 $1,11920 ------|------|--------|------------|-----------. 1873. ----------------------------------------------. 4 29 7, 748 88 3, 441 69 3 23 516 || $5,649 70 $2,586 53 1874. ----------------------------------------------- 4 8 4,994 56 2, 129 70 3 22 491 3, 184 39 1, 354 50 1875------------------------------------------------ 8 22 9, 18593 4,062 78 |------|------|--------|------------|------------ 1876------------------------------------------------ 7 21 5, 752 05 2, 348 16 ||------|------|--------|------------|------------ Total ---------------------------------------- 31 21 || 30, 482 36 13, 101 53 7 15 1, 007 8,834 09 3,941 03 Lost November 25, 1876, on La Have Banks. Schooner Pharsalia. [76 96-100 tons. 12 hands codfishing.] 1875-----------------------------------------------. 5 25 | $4,421 20 $1,942 77 ------|------|--------|------------|------------ -- Sailed for Western Banks September 15, 1875, and never returned. # 2696 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. NO. 59. TUESDAY, October 16, 1877. The Conference met. ELIPHALET W. FRENCH, of Eastport, Me., fish merchant, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Trescot: Question. You are a native of Eastport, I believe?—Answer. I am. Q. What age are you ?—A. Forty-one years. Q. In what business are you engaged ?—A. In the wholesale fish bus- iness and fitting out. Q. How long have you been engaged in it?—A. Twenty years. Q. As in business for yourself, or as clerk, or how %–A. I have been in business for myself nineteen years last February; previous to that I was in a store with my father. Q. What was your father's business?—A. He followed the same busi- T10SS. Q. How long did he follow it?—A. Nearly forty years. Q. So the firm of which you are a member now, and which you rep- resent, and the business in which your father was previously, extend over how many years?—A. Something like sixty years in the same busi- IleSS. Q. Will you explain to the Commission what the business is ?—A. Buying and selling fish and fitting fishermen. Q. Buying fish whereabouts, as a general rule 2—A. From fishermen. Q. From fishermen, where?—A. At Grand Manan, Deer Island, Cam- pobello, Indian Island, and Beaver Harbor. Q. Is it a matter of necessity in your business that you should have a pretty good knowledge of the fishing at those places º–A. Yes. Q. You make or lose money according to the completeness and pre- cision of your knowledge of that fishery º–A. Yes. Q. What is the fishery at Grand Manan and the Bay of Fundy gen- erally 3—A. Codfish, pollock, hake, haddock, and herring. rº Q. Are any of those fisheries entirely off-shore fisheries 7–A. Codfish is an off-shore fishery. Hake are taken off shore. - Q Q. Entirely or partially 3—A. Hake are entirely taken off shore now. Q. Was it once an inshore fishery º–A. Yes; it is only within three or four years they have been taken off shore. Q. Before that it was inshore ?—A. Inshore and out, both. Q. How about haddock 3–A. Haddock is mostly an inshore fishery. Q. Herring, of course, is an inshore fishery 3—A. Partly. Q. Into what divisions do you mark the herringfishery 3–A. There are smoked, pickled, and frozen herring. Q. With regard to smoked herring, where is the market for smoked herring that come from the Bay of Fundy, Grand Manan, and the isl- ands of the mainland 3–A. Boston and New York, principally. Q. Are they sent to Boston and New York from Eastport, or do many go direct 3—A. They send most of them to Eastport. They are brought there in boats, and sent from there in steamers and sailing vessels. At Grand Manan they have three or four large vessels by which they ship them to Boston and New York direct. Q. Are those American vessels or Grand Manan vessels owned by Grand Manan people?—A.. I know one that is chartered is an American vessel, because it is my own vessel. I don’t know in regard to others. Q. Do they ship on account of Americans, or do they charter the ves- sels º–A. They are chartered by Grand Manan people. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2697 . Q. Have you any idea of what is the value of the smoked-herring business at Grand Manan 3–A. I should place'it at about $400,000. Q. Do you know by whom that fishery is conducted ?—A. It is con- ducted by the inhabitants of Grand Manan. Q. Entirely 3–A. Almost entirely. I understand there is a man at Eastport who owns part of a weir over there, or has an interest in Soume way in Weirs there. - Q. But, as a general thing, it is emphatically a native fishery 3–A. Yes. - Q. With regard to the frozen herring, is that the same 2—A. Yes. Q. Have you any idea of the value of the frozen-herring fishery of Grand Manan 7–A. I think about $40,000. Q. Is that exclusively a native fishery, or do Americans go and par- ticipate in it?—A. Very few Americans do. Some small vessels at East- port go over there. .” Q. How many ?—A. Perhaps half a dozen. - Q. Can you form any idea as to what proportion the value of their catch bears to the $40,000 you have mentioned?—A. It would be a very Small part, because Grand Manan owns perhaps twice as many vessels as the Eastport people, and there are vessels at Campobello, Wilson's Beach, and Deer Island. Q. As to the pickled-herring fishery, is that a special business, and is it Valuable %–A. It is not so valuable as the others. Q. IS that conducted in the same way ?—A. Yes. Q. Are Americans engaged in catching and Smoking herring on Our Own Coast 3–A. Yes. Q. To any large extent?—A. Yes. Q. Do you know what is the value of the Maine coast smoked-herring fishery by American fishermen 3–A. No ; but from the number of weirs, I should think there are as many herring smoked on the coast of Maine as on the English side. - w Q. Do the herring smoked on the American side equal the British her- ring in qualify and bring as much in the market 2—A. Yes; there is one particular place at the town of Cutler and another at Manleybridge, farther on the coast of Maine. Manleybridge herring bring a better price than any other herring shipped to Boston and New York. Man- leybridge is near Mount Desert. - Q. Now, with regard to the remaining fisheries—cod, hake, and had- dock. The cod fishery, you say, is an off-shore fishery º–A. Yes. Q. IS the hake fishery an American or English fishery 2—A. It is an English fishery. - l Q. Is it both 2–A. It is almost entirely English. Those few vessels I spoke of go over there hake fishing. - Q. What is your estimate of the hake fishery 3 Do you deal very much in hake 3—A. Yes; I deal in them. I should think there might have been 25,000 quintals taken this season. Q. The large majority of those would be taken by British fishermen and in British Waters ?—A. Yes. The boats fish near the shore, but the Vessels all fish outside. Q. IS the bulk of the fish taken outside, and is it considered to be an outside fishery 3—A. I think it has been for the last two or three years. Q. With regard to haddock, how is that ?—A. It is taken inshore and out, both. Q. Then with regard to the fisheries of the county of Charlotte, you know pretty much what their extent is, do you not ?—A. Yes. Q. What do you estimate as the value of the whole fisheries of the :- 2698 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. county ?—A. I should say the fishery at Campobello, Deer Island, and Indian Island would be about equal in value to what it is at Grand Ma- nan. Up the north shore I don’t know so much about ; it is not to that extent ; it may be half what it is at Grand Manan. I should think $1,000,000 would cover the whole of the fishery. Q. With your knowledge of that fishery and your dealings with the fishermen, and the necessity of knowing what the catch is, would you say that any appreciable portion is caught by American fishermen º–A. No ; I should consider it an English fishery. - Q. Would you consider there was any possibility for the catch made by American fishermen to be so large as to equal that amounting to $1,000,000 caught by British fishermen 7–A. No ; by no means. Q. Is it possible that such a state of things should exist without you being acquainted with it 3–A. No. Q. Do you know Mr. James McLean *—A. I know him by sight. Q. Do you know where he carries on business %–A. The firm does business at Letite and Lepreau. - | Q. I want to call your attention to some of his testimony with regard to his estimates of the fishery of Charlotte County, and ask whether you think it correct, and, if not, how it should be reduced. The follow- ing is from Mr. McLean’s testimony: Q. Judging from your practical knowledge of the fishery, being an owner of fish- ing-vessels and dealing with the men who fish as you do, what do you say, at a low figure, would be the value of the fisheries and the actual worth of the fish caught by JBritish subjects between the points you mention, from Lepreau to Letite? What would be a fair average value from 1871?—A. I should estimate the quantity for Charlotte County and the adjoining islands. We all fish; and it would be difficult to separate the two. - Q. You are acquainted with the catch of the island as well ?—A. Yes. I visit Grand Manan Island occasionally, and the adjoining islands often. ... Q. What is the catch of the whole º–A. A low estimate for our fishery would be $1,000,000 for each year. That is about the estimate you made just now %–A. Yes. Q. Then there is the following: Q. For British subjects?—A. Yes. Q. That is a low estimate 3—A. Yes; I think I am under the mark; in fact, I have no doubt of it all. - Q. And it may be a good deal more ?—A. Yes. Q. You have not a shadow of a doubt that it is at least a million ?—A. No. Q. And our American friends take a considerable amount more ?—A. They take as many. Q. They have more men and more vessels?—A. Yes. - Q. And they take at least as much 3—A. Yes; fully as much as we do, if not IſlOI 62. - Q. Have you any doubt that they do take more ?—A. I believe that they take 300 OTO, Q. You have no doubt of it 3–A. No. Q. That would make a million dollars' worth taken by them?—A. They must take a million dollars’ worth. - Q. That is the very least calculation ?—A. Yes; I put it down as low as possible, to be safe and sure. Q. They take at least as much as we do 2–A. I believe that they take more, and they take as much any way. - Q. The American catch, as well as our own, on which you place an estimate of a million dollars in value, is taken within three miles of the shore ?—A. Yes; I am confining myself to within the 3-mile limit. . Are you in a position to say whether that is true or not ?—A. I don’t think it is true. I think he has made a mistake. Q. Do you think your business is such that you would know the fact if it was so 7–A. Yes. - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2699 Q. That there could not be two million dollars’ worth caught instead of one million without you knowing it in your business %–A. Yes. Q. If it is so, that would make a very good business for the merchants in Eastport, if they deal entirely with Grand Manan 3–A. Yes; Campo- bello, Deer Island, and Grand Manan. Q. What is the condition of things 2 Is it such as to indicate very large profits to the fishermen º–A. No. Q. What is the reason 3—A. There is not much money in the fishery. Q. To the Eastport people, you mean *—A. Yes; and I have suffered a loss by it; that is, in the fitting-out part, I mean. Q. What do you say to this: | Q. Along the coast of Maine, say from Eastport westward, there lives a large popula- tion who fish entirely in our waters?—A. Yes. They come from Lubec, Perry, Pem- broke, and Eastport, and along by Cutler and westward of Lubec, and still farther away than that. Q, And from Machias ?—A. I think so. Q. They all come and fish in our waters?—A. Yes. Q. And not in their own waters?—A. I do not know of any fishing within the three- mile limit in their waters. & Within three miles of their coast there is no fishing of which you are aware ?— • Y 63S. Q. And this is a population that lives by fishing alone?—A. From Eastport and along there they follow fishing for a livelihood, beyond question. Q. So that a large body of American fishermen gain their whole livelihood in our waters ?—A. Yes; those that fish there do. A. That is not so. Q. State to the Commission what you know of the habits of those people.—A. It speaks of the people being engaged in fishing only. They are engaged in farming mostly; that is really their business, but they carry on both fishing and farming. There are only one or two or three or four vessels owned at Lubec, one or two at Machias, and one at Jonesport, that come down there. Q. I find this, also, in Mr. McLean’s testimony, speaking about St. Andrew’s : Q. It is sometimes called the Inner Bay of Passamaquoddy?—A. I suppose that it is, Q. Was not that at one time a great herring-ground 3–A. It was once a splendid fishing-ground. Q. Since the negotiation of the Washington Treaty, and since the Americans have fished there, what has become of it 3–A. It has been destroyed within the last two years. It is now no good whatever. Q. How did the Americans destroy it 2–A. By bringing too many vessels there, and by setting too many nets. The water is quite rough there at times, the wind blowing heavily in from the northwest. Northwest winds prevail in winter, and three years. ago we had a very hard winter. - DO §. know anything of the destruction of fish in St. Andrew’s Bay ?— A. NO. Q. You know something about the fishing there ?—A. Yes; I know there are as many herring taken there as there ever were. A year ago last Spring the catch was unusually large. tº Q. He says there is no fishing within three miles of the American shore; do you know of any fishing done not only by Americans but by English fishermen on the American shore ?—A. The best fishing in St. Andrew’s Bay is on the American side, from Dog Island, on Eastport, to Lowerin’s Cove, in Perry. There are other places of course, on the American shore. Tilere are herring taken at Cross Island, near Machias, and Libby Island, at the mouth of Machias River. Q. Do you know any fishing-vessels engaged fishing within the three miles of the American shore ?—A. All vessels from the other side fish in St. Andrew's Bay on the American side. 2700 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Do you know Walter B. McLaughlin —A. Only by reputation as keeper of a light-house. - Q. I want to call your attention to his testimony. There is the fol- lowing: Q. Now, in the spring are you not visited by the Grand Manan fleet from Glouces- ter?—A. Yes; they used formerly to come to Grand Manan direct. Generally now they go to Eastport and get the Eastport people to catch bait for them. Q. When you say “formerly,” do you mean after the Treaty of Washington ?—A. Yes; they did not come before that much. It is since 1871 that they have come prin- cipally. They will come down every spring. Q. How long do they last 2—A. Sometimes a longer and sometimes a shorter time. Q. How many years after the treaty did it commence?—A. It has lasted down to the present time, for that matter. There has not been so many this last spring as before. Q. I thought you said there had been a change in the practice 3—A. There has not been a change in the practice of getting bait at our places, but in the mode of getting it. They generally come to Eastport and make that their place of departure. The Eastport people are acquainted with our waters almost as well as our own people, and they come across and catch fish and sell to the Gloucester fishermen; that is the ma- ority of the cases now. Q. I understand that at f ist they came down themselves and bought 7–A. Yes. Q. And now they come ci lefly to Eastport to employ Eastport fishermen, who catch the fish and bring them to them 2–A. The big vessels are not fitted out for herring fishing. They take an East ort vessel in company with them and come over and an- chor in our waters. They b ing their own fishermen with them and anchor in our waters, and get their bait tº ere. They sometimes come in the fall for bait. What do you know aſ out that ?—A. I know that it is not so. I have seen 40 vessels from Gle icester lying in the harbor of Eastport for bait, and the boats would bri g the bait from the other side, and would bait them up. - Q. The boats would come from Grand Manan 7–A. From Campobello and Deer Island. When I speak of the other side I mean the British Islands. Q. There is also the following: Q. You are well acquainted with the fisheries of Charlotte County. Take the main- land fishing from Letete as far as Lepreau, is that a good fishing-ground 3–A. It is considered a good fishing-ground; I am not personally acquainted with it, and can only say from what I have heard; my duties have never carried me there. - Q. But your practical knowledge extends there 7–A. Yes. -- Q. What would be the value of the mainland fishery, the British fishery alone, taking it from Letete to Lepreaux 2–A. My own fishery is, say, $500,000; Campobello and West Isles must equal mine, and the mainland will certainly be more than half of that, if not equal to it. - Q. Well, then, you put Campobello and West Isles as about equal to Grand Manan 3– A. Yes; speaking as I do, not knowing exactly, I should say so. Q. That would be half a million for those two islands, and half a million for Grand Manan—that makes a million ; and you think the mainland is half as much as either of those ; that would be a fair estimate for the mainland 2–A. Yes; Charlotte County is a very important fishing county. In 1861 I was a census enumerator, and I think the result of the fishery in that county nearly equaled that of all the other fisheries of the province, with the exception of St. John County. Q. You put half a million as the catch of the British fishermen on the mainland for the year, and, in your judgment, the American catch is the same 3–A. All I can judge is by what I hear. They come down in their vessels. I think they have their own way on the north shore, very much more than on Grand Manan; I have a great deal of trouble with them there. But on the north shore I think they have things pretty much as they want. I would say that they probably surpass our own catch. You don’t agree with that estimate %–A. No. By Mr. Thomson: Q. I want to call your attention to the last paragraph read to you, in which you contradicted the evidence of Mr. McLaughlin. Mr. Trescot read to you the following: . . - * e Q. You are well acquainted with the fisheries of Charlotte County; take the main- land from Letete as far as Lepreau, is that a good fishing-ground?—A. I am not per- sonally acquainted with it ; I can only say from what I have heard. My duties have never carried me there. Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2701 Do you undertake to say that the fishing-ground from Lepreau to Letete is a bad fishing-ground 3–A. No. Q. Then what made you contradict the statement?—A.. I contradicted that remark he made in regard to American fishermen having their own • Way. - Q. The whole passage was read to you and you contradicted it 2—A. I referred to the last part that was read. Q. Did you hear the whole read 7–A. Yes. Q. Why did you not qualify your contradiction ?—A. I do so now. Q. You admit that if I had not called attention to it, your statement would have gone as contradicting Mr. McLaughlin’s testimony ?—A. I referred to the last part of what was read. Q. I call your attention to this: Q. What would be the value of the mainland fishery, the British fishery alone, taking it from Letite to Lepreau ?—A. My own fishery is, say $500,000; Campobello and West Isles must equal mine; and the mainland will certainly be more than half of that, if not equal to it. - You have said that Campobello and the West Islands would equal Grand Manan 3–A. Campobello and West Isles would be, I think, about the same as Grand Manan. Q. That is the statement made here by Mr. McLaughlin, and you con- tradicted it.—A. I did not refer to that part. Q. Mr. McLaughlin puts down that Campobello and West Isles would be equal to Grand Manan. Do you contradict that ?—A. I admit it to be true, so far as I know. Q. You said in your answer to Mr. Trescot you did not agree to that. How often have you been at Grand Manan for the purpose of inquiring. into the value and extent of the fishery 3–A.. I have never been there. All I know is from the fish that come from there. Q. Never having been there, you yet presume to put your opinion against and contradict the statement of Mr. McLaughlin, who has been there and has a practical knowledge of it 7–A. I know about it from what I learn from the fishermen. I give my opinion of the value of the fishery. Q. You put your opinion against the oath of Mr. McLaughlin, who has a practical knowledge of it 2—A. Yes, I put my opinion against his Opinion. Q. Although you have never been there and never examined closely into the extent of the fishery 3–A. I know the fish that come from there. - Q. Do all the fish that come from there go to Eastport 2—A. I think they do. Q. Will you swear to that ?—A. No ; because there are a few go to St. John's—a very small quantity. Q. Will you swear that none are sent direct elsewhere than to St. John’s and Eastport 3–A. I don’t know of any. Q. Do you mean to say that American vessels which come down to catch fish off the main land take it to Eastport? Do you not know that they take the fish direct to Boston, Newburyport, or other ports on the American coast 3–A. I do not know it. Q. Do you say that they do not ?—A. I never heard of vessels going there. & Q. If American vessels have gone there and fished off the main land, you have never heard of it 2–A. No. Q. If American vessels do go and fish there, would they not carry their cargoes elsewhere than to Eastport 3–A. I don’t think they would. 2702. Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. I think all the fish would come into Eastport, because all the fishing is done in smaller vessels, from 10 to 20 tons. tº Q. If vessels are sent down from Gloucester or Newburyport, or . Machias, do you say they would necessarily call at Eastport after taking a cargo in our waters ?—A. Machias vessels would, because they sell at Eastport. Q. Do they always sell there?—A. Yes. Q. They never sell at Machias ?—A. I never knew them do so. Q. How does that happen 3–A. Because Eastport is their market. Q. Is there no market at Machias 3–A. Not to any extent. Q. Did I understand you to say, in speaking of St. Andrew's Bay, that the best fishing was on the American shore ?—A. Yes. Q. And you further stated that Machias River ran into that bay ?— A. No; I said there were herring taken at Cross Island. Q. Did you not say when speaking of the fishing in St. Andrew's Bay, that the best fishing was on the American shore, and went on to speak of the Machias River running into the bay ?—A. No; I will explain the statement. I say the best fishing in St. Andrew’s Bay is from Dog Island at Eastport to Lowerin’s Cove in Perry, and there are also herring taken at Cross Island, at Machias. Q. What have Cross Island and Machias to do with St. Andrew’s Bay ?—A. I was asked in regard to where herring are taken on the American shore. - ' c Q. You say you have never been to the main land, and have not therefore examined the fisheries, and yet you swear you don’t know of American vessels going there?—A. I don’t swear that. I know of half a dozen vessels owned in Eastport. Q. Do they go and fish there 3—A. Yes. Q. Off the main land 3–A. Yes. - Q. What part of the main land 2—A. Off Lepreau; I know they fish in that vicinity. I don’t know as much about the fishing there as I do at Deer Island, Grand Manan and Campobello. Q. Do you know where the fishing places on the main land are 3—A. I know they fish off Beaver Harbor, Lepreau and Letite and in that vicinity. Q. Dont they fish at Back Bay ?—A. Yes, they fish there; principally in the winter. - Q. And at Mace's Bay ?—A.. I have not heard of fish being taken at Mace's Bay. Q. You don’t pretend to know where the fishing places are on the main land?—A. I have some general idea of them. Q. Have you ever been to St. George 3—A. Yes. Q. How long is it since you were last there 7—A. Several years. Q. Have you been there during the last ten years 3–A. I think so. Q. Have you ever been in the adjoining parish, which borders on the bay, Pennfield 7–A. No. Q. Or the next parish, Lepreau ?—A. I have never been to Lepreau. Q. Have you been along the inner bay of Passamaquoddy, along the Shore ?—A. No. - Q. You have been to St. Andrew’s, I suppose?—A. Yes. Q. How long is it since you were last there ?—A. A year or two. Q. St. Andrew’s is connected by a steamer with Eastport 2—A. Yes. Q. It is easy of access %–A. Yes. • Q. To St. George or St. Patrick, Pennfield or Lepreau you have never been, and you have been to St. George once, and that was 10 years. ago 3–A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 27.03. dº Q. Yet you put your opinion against that of a man who has been on the ground 3–A. I make my estimate from vessels from Eastport which I know fish there, from the English fish which comes into Eastport from that way, and from conversations with fishermen in regard to the fishing there. Q. That is all 7–A. Yes. * - Q. Did you have those conversations for the express purpose of find- ing out how many fish were taken along the British coast?—A. No; it was. neVer mentioned. Q. You never had any object in finding out what the catch was ?—A. No ; I never inquired. - Q. How often have you visited Grand Manan 3–A. I have never bee at Grand Manan. Q. Campobello, which is quite near to Eastport—you have been there, I Suppose 3—A. Yes. Q. Is there valuable fishing ground on Campobello shore ?—A. They put up a good many smoked herring. Q. There is good fishing between Eastport and Campobello, within three miles of Campobello shore ?—A. Yes. Q. The fishing within three miles of Campobello shore is better than. the fishing on the American coast, is it not ?—A. The distance between Eastport and Campobello is only one mile and three-quarters. Q. The fishing close up to the island is better than on the American Coast 3—A. It is everywhere in the bay. Q. Is it not better close to the shores of Campobello than close to the American shores 3–A. It is pretty difficult to tell where the line runs. there. Q. IS not the channel much nearer the American shore than to the island of Campobello 7–A. The place where they catch most of the fish is between Eastport and Campobello, and is called the Ledge. I think it is about half way between the two. Q. IS not the channel nearerer the American shore than Campo- bello?—A. There is not any channel there; it is all deep water. Q. When the tide is out is there not a well-known channel there close to the American shore?—A. No ; a vessel can anchor anywhere off Eastport. Q. Don’t you know that the British line runs close to the American Shore ?—A. No ; I don’t know where the line does run, or anybody else. Q. And you don’t know the channel close to the American shore ?— A. No, I don’t know it ; I never heard any channel spoken of between Eastport and Campobello. Q. Are there a large number of weirs round Campobello?—A. A good many. Q. Are there any on the Eastport side 3–A. Yes. Q. Many?—A. A good many. Q. At Eastport 7–A. Yes. Q. Are there many between Eastport and Lubec and along the Shore ?—A. There are weirs at Perry, Lubec, and Cutler. Q. Which is nearest to Eastport, Perry or Lubec”—A. Perry adjoins. Eastport on the mainland. Lubec is about two miles opposite to East- port by water. Q. Along that shore, from Eastport to Lubec, are there on the American shore many weirs?—A. I should think there were. Q. Do you know of your own knowledge that there are ?—A. I know- there is a large number. Q: What do they take?—A. Herring. 2704 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. ſ Q. And other fish?—A. No ; there is a place at Treat's Island where there is an immense quantity of herring taken. Q. Where is that ?—A. It is part of Eastport, but it is an island. It is owned by a man named Treat, who is a resident of Eastport, and a great many herring are taken at that island. Q. Do I understand you to say that along the American shore they can catch as many herring as they want 7–A. If they followed it as a business they could. Q. Why do they not follow it 3–A. A good many are engaged in farming. Those living at Eastport, where the weirs are, have large farms there, and do a great deal of farming besides. Q. Are all the herring sold at Eastport 3 Is that the market 2—A. Yes. - Q. Did I not understand you that when American vessels came down of late years men came over with herring from Grand Manan 3–A. It is a different kind to what is taken in weirs. The weir herring are small herring. Q. They don’t use them for bait 2—A. No. Q. Don’t you catch large herring on your coast 2—A. They do in Winter. Q. They do not take large herring in the weirs?—A. Not to any ex- tent. Q. Then there are no large herring taken on your coast 3—A. Yes; there are. Q. How many are taken 3–A. There are large herring taken in One of the coves at Eastport. - Q. Are they taken to any extent 3–A. A good many. Q. Are they used for bait 2–A. They can use them for bait, but they are mostly taken in winter and frozen and brought into Eastport and shipped by steamer. - - & Q. At what season do the vessels which the fishermen supply with bait come down to Lubec 7–A. In the spring. Q. If there are so many herring on your coast, why do not American fishermen supply the vessels coming down in the spring for baitº AC- cording to you the British fishermen go out and supply them with bait, though they have plenty on their own shores. How do you account for it?—A. There are several reasons. One thing is they would rather buy it from fishermen on the other side. The reason is because there are Englishmen from Campobello on board those vessels and they, of course, will patronize their own people. I will give you an illustration if you will allow me. Last March a gentleman from Gloucester, Mr. Babson, came to me to get up a quantity of herring to send to the Swedish mar- ket. I had them put in barrels and sent to my place in Eastport. He employed a man named Calder, of Campobello, to buy herring for him. After he got through there were so many small herring found among them that there was a loss on the enterprise, and the small herring had to be sold for smoking. The fishermen from the other side who came and wanted to sell, told him that Calder would not patronize any ex- cept his own people at Campobello, and but for them, they could have sold him large herring. I don’t know what there is in the statement; I give it as I got it. - Q. Do I understand that on board every vessel there are Englishmen who prevent the vessels from dealing with American fishermen 3—A.. I don’t know that there are altogether. Every season a great many go from the other side up to Gloucester to ship in those vessels. Eastport AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2705 vessels on Grand Manan Banks are filled with fishermen from Campo- bello and Deer Island. Q. Do I understand you to say that the majority of the crews are British or Americans of the vessels which come down 3–A. At East- port the majority of them are British subjects, fishermen from Campo- bello and Deer Island. Q. Those are they who man the vessels 2—A. Eastport vessels which go to the Banks. Q. I am speaking of the vessels which come in the spring for bait 3– A. I don’t think the majority are. Q. Though the majority are not English, the minority can control and make them buy of the British and not Americans. How do you account for that ?–A. I account for it in this way, that those who are engaged in catching herring at that time are fishermen at Campobello and Deer Island, who come over to Eastport in their boats, and sell their herring to those vessels. Q. I want to know how that happens, when there are plenty of herring on your own shore. Do you account for it by saying that the British On board control the Americans ?—A. To some extent. Q. It is a curious thing, which you are not able to explain 3–A. I don’t think any herring are taken at Eastport at the time those vessels come there for bait. I think the herring are taken on the other side , altogether. - Q. You have never been to Grand Manan 7–A. No. Q. Do you undertake to say that there is not a large fleet of American Vessels fishing in there every year?—A. I should say there is not. I should be likely to know it if there was. Q. Not for herring alone, but for other fish 7–A. Some vessels fish there for codfish. Q. If such a thing happened you would have heard it 2–A. Yes. Q. You have heard of Mr. McLaughlin 2—A. Yes. Q. He is a respectable man 3–A. Yes. Q. He must have committed deliberate perjury in having stated that he saw American vessels there, you not having heard of any being there 4–A.. I don’t say that. - Q. Do I understand you to say that you don’t mean any American vessels come there for the purpose of fishing?—A. I don’t say so. I say vessels do come there cod-fishing. º Q. For herring every year?—A. Not to any extent. Q. You don’t believe it”—A. No. Q. Then if Mr. McLaughlin swore that they did, he was committing deliberate perjury 2—A. I have nothing to say to that. Q. Mr. McLaughlin having sworn what he swore, and you having given the Opinion that, in your judgment, those vessels were not there, I ask you if you can escape the conclusion that Mr. McLaughlin was telling what was false?—A. I think Mr. McLaughlin was right when he told Somebody in Eastport that he would like to alter the testimony he had given here. I don’t say anything as to whether Mr. McLaughlin told the truth or not. • - Q. You, a man who has never been at the island, and consequently never saw what the fishing there was, put your opinion against that of a man who has been there and seen it?—A. I do ; for I know from ves- Sels which come from there to Eastport. Q. Do you swear that a large fishing-fleet from Gloucester does not Come down there and fish round the island, especially for herring 2—A. I don't know that there is, only, as I said, for codfish. 170 F. 27.06 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. I want to call your attention to a statement made in the Cape Ann Advertiser; I suppose you are aware it is a fisherman’s organ 3–A. I know it is a paper published in Gloucester, that is all I know of it. Q. I call your attention to a statement published in the issue of Feb- ruary 23, 1877. It is as follows: From this humble beginning may be traced the success of the herring business, which has developed into a leading business industry, and employs many of the finest vessels of the fleet. For the first dozen years the business was confined to Newfoundland voy- ages; but of late years an extensive herring business has grown up with Grand Manan, and a few cargoes are brought annually from Nova Scotia. Q. What do you say to that?—A. It refers to frozen herring. Q. It says: “Of late years an extensive business has grown up with Grand Manan’?—A. I say that is true; I don’t deny it. The vessels that come from Gloucester in the Winter season go to Grand Manan first to buy cargoes of frozen herring. Q. This article is headed “The herring business of Gloucester,” and it says: - This herring industry enables our vessels to prosecute the Bank fisheries in February and March, when immense schools of fish resort thither, and the largest fares are brought in ; it furnishes a valuable article of nourishing food for the New York, Boston, and other markets at a low price, and within the last year it has opened a profitable com- merce with Sweden, from which the best of results are anticipated. Another paragraph from the same article reads: The export trade of the past season, and the improved demand for home consump- tion, gave an impetus to the various branches of the herring fishery the past season, and some thirty-nine vessels were employed in the Newfoundland herring trade, salt and fresh, while some thirty-six vessels made herring trips to Grand Manan and Nova Scotia on Gloucester account. Most of the fleet have completed their voyages, and besides keeping this market well stocked, eight cargoes from Newfoundland and five from Grand Manan have been forwarded to New York, three Manan fares have been sent to Philadelphia, and three Newfoundland and three New Brunswick cargoes have been marketed in Boston. Do you believe those statements?—A. That refers entirely to the frozen-herring business, from the fact that it says they send them to New York and Philadelphia, and Gloucester vessels come down to Grand Manan and buy cargoes of herring, take them to Gloucester, and send them to markets at New York or Philadelphia. Q. What is the practice round Grand Manan as to buying herring 7– A. They pay so much per hundred for them. Q. Do they fish for them themselves 2—A. No ; they buy them. Q. You never have been there 3—A. No. Q. You swear positively that they don’t catch them?—A. Yes. Q. Do they employ the fishermen to catch herring for them 2–A. The fishermen catch the herring, and they buy them and pay so much per hundred. Q. They never catch a herring 2—A. Not to any extent. Q. To what extent do they catch them 3–A. It is very slight. In fact, I think they have given it up altogether; a few vessels formerly brought down nets. The skippers of those vessels have told me it did not pay to catch the herring, and they would rather buy them. I know one particular friend of mine who did this last winter. Again, the fishermen about Deer Island won't let them catch herring, and cut their nets, saying that the fishing belongs to them. Q. Although you were never at Grand Manan, you swear positively that the Americans do not fish there?—A, I say they don't to any extent. Q. That you swear to positively 2—A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2707 Q. As a matter you are sure of ?–A. Yes; as far as I can be sure of anything by conversing with fishermen. Q. Without any knowledge of your own 2–A. That is all the knowl- edge I have, and that ought to be enough. - Q. I want to call your attention to a statement in the Cape Ann Advertiser of January 26, 1877. Before I do so I wish to ask you if it is well understood there is a herring fleet that comes down there every season 3–A. Yes; there are a number of Schooners that come down for herring. - Q. Is it called the herring fleet 7–A.. I don’t know whether it is or not. I know they come there to buy herring. Q. This paper also says: The number of fishing arrivals reported at this port the past week has been four- teen—ten from the Banks and La Have, and four from Grand Manan. The New Bruns- wick herring-fleet bring good cargoes, and the supply, being greater than will be needed to bait the fishing fleets, will be marketed in part in other markets. That shows they go down to get bait 2—A. Yes; because it is frozen herring they get for bait. They bait the vessels for going on the Grand Banks. Q. Is this true 2 I am reading now from “The Fisheries of Glouces- ter from 1623 to 1876,” published by Procter Bros., of Gloucester, in 1876 : The Newfoundland and New Brunswick herring fisheries, of comparatively recent origin, while not unattended with hardship and danger, became at once an important auxiliary of the Georges and Banks fisheries, and have been pursued unremittingly from the start. - A. I don't know anything about the Newfoundland herring fishery. Q. Then about New Brunswick 7–A. I know they come there every winter. “s r Q. Do you deny that?—A. It connects Newfoundland and New Bruns- wick. There may be hardships and dangers attending the Newfound- land fishery. I don’t know about that. Q. There is no hardship, in your estimation, about the Newfoundland fishery 3–A. No. Q. You think the writer would connect New Brunswick with New- foundland, and say there are hardships when he only meant it was in Newfoundland that hardships were incurred 3—A. I don’t know what he meant. Q. He says that in that enterprise there were dangers and hard- ships ?—A. It may be very well for a man sitting in his room to write Such an article. Q. Probably such a man could write this of the fisheries as a man living at Eastport could speak of the fishing at Grand Manan, when he had never been there ?—A. No ; only he had not been engaged in the fishing business for 20 years, as I have been. Q. You never did any fishing round Grand Manan and never saw it 7–A. But I have bought the fish and had conversations with fisher- Ill 60. Q. In the same article as I have read, it says further: During the present season herring have been shipped hence to Sweden, at a good profit, and it is not impossible that this may prove the initial step toward the resump- tion of exportation of fish to foreign ports, an important industry of the port in the early days of its fishing enterprise. Do you agree with that ?—A. That is correct; the herring are put up at Eastport. Q. They are put up at Eastport and sent to Gloucester 2—A. Yes 2708 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. two or three different firms from Gloucester bought herring in Eastport last year. One I packed out, and another party was there buying them packed up in barrels. Q. Do I understand that you wish the Commissioners to believe that the Gloucester fleet comes down for the purpose of getting herring round Grand Manan, goes down to Eastport and ships herring there ? —A. Yes... These parties are from Gloucester. gºšº º Q. Does the New Brunswick fishing-fleet, the herring-fleet, take their cargoes into Eastport before they go to Gloucester?—A. They go down on the north side and buy herring and take them to Gloucester. Q. It comes to this. You come here for the purpose of contradicting Mr. McLaughlin as to what took place on the island of Grand Manan, where you say you never were in your life. Is that true?—A.. I did not come here to contradict Mr. McLaughlin. Q. You have in fact contradicted Mr. McLaughlin 3–A. I have told what I know. * Q. You put your opinion as to the facts respecting fishing round Grand Manan—though you have never been there in your life—against the opinion of Mr. McLaughlin, who has resided there all his life, and Swears to certain facts. You do the same with regard to the main land, where you have never been, except once to St. George, and that ten years ago?—A. I consider I know as much about the fishing, buying fish at Eastport which comes from there, as Mr. McLaughlin, who keeps a light-house, knows about it. Q. Are you aware that it is part of Mr. McLaughlin’s business to go round to all the fishermen and ascertain exactly what the American catch was 3–A. I understand he is fishery-warden there. Q. Do I understand you to say you have as good a means of informa- tion in regard to Grand Manan as Mr. McLaughlin 7–A. I think I have. ... ? - Q. Do you swear you have as good means of information as Mr. James McLean in regard to the mainland fishery, he living there and doing business there?—A. I think so. He is engaged there in buying fish, and I am engaged at Eastport buying it. Q. Are you aware that he is engaged in fishing?—A. No ; he is a merchant. º Q. Do you swear he does not send out any fishing-vessels and small boats?—A. He may send out some fishing-boats, but the principal part of his business is that of a merchant. Q. If he swears that he sends out fishing-vessels and boats, do you mean to Say the statement is untrue?—A. He may do that. Q. You undertake to put your opinion against his?—A. Yes. Q. Though you never have been there at all ?—A. Yes. Q. Mr. McLaughlin has said this: Q. Now about how many American vessels fish on the coast during the season ?—A. It would be hard to tell that ; it has never been my duty to count them. Q. They come in large numbers, and they generally outnumber ours?—A. Yes; our people at Grand Manan fish but little in vessels. You contradict that?—A. I do. º Q. You say they fish a great deal in vessels and very little in boats?— A.. I say Very few American vessels come there to fish. Q. Do you contradict the statement that Grand Manan people fish very little in vessels?—A. They have a dozen or twenty vessels over there. Q. Do you contradict the statement or do you not?—A. I don’t know what he calls small or large. - AWARD OF 'IHE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2709 Q. You swear that the Grand Manan people fish round their own coast 3—A. Yes. Q. Do you say that the American vessels do not outnumber the Grand Manan vessels?—A. I say they do not. Q. Though you had not been there at all?—A. I have not been there, but I know. Q. You swear positively that the statement is not true?—A. Yes. Q. Mr. McLaughlin also said: - Q. Do these vessels come in fishing within three miles 3–A. At a certain time of the year; in winter it is entirely within ; the fall and winter fishing is entirely within. Do you contradict that ?—A. The most of those vessels fish on Grand Manan Banks. . Q. That is not the question. [Extract re-read.] What do you say to that ?—A. I say that in winter perhaps half a dozen vessels owned in Eastport may go over to Grand Manan fishing. They all fish inside when the herring are inside; within the last two or three or four years the herring have been outside, and they fished outside for them. * Q. So the statement is not true that the fall and winter fishing for herring is entirely inside 3–A. It is not entirely inside. Q. Is the bulk of it outside º–A. No ; I don’t know that the bulk is. Q. You say that the fall and winter fishing is entirely outside 3—A. Not entirely; I say to a great extent. Q. The larger portion is outside º–A. The boat fishermen of Grand Manan and the islands of New Brunswick are complaining that the nets each year are being set further off shore, and within the last year or two or two or three years they have been so greedy, they say, that they have put their nets four or five miles out. Q. Tell me a single man who has told you that the fishing in the fall and winter fishery is not within three miles of the shore ?—A. I cannot give you the name of a Grand Manan man, but I can give you the name of a man who has been continually fishing there and in that vicinity for twenty years. It is not only at Grand Manan but at other places they are complaining. Q. Can you give me the name of any Grand Manan man who told you that ?—A. It was not a Grand Manan man who told me. Q. It comes to this: those men who are on the spot and ought to be able to know all about the fishing, you contradict, though you have not been on the spot ?—A. I say my means of information are as good as theirs. I have been employed in business twenty years, and I have been accustomed to converse with fishermen. Q. Do you seriously swear before the Commission that your opinion With reference to the fisheries prosecuted on the main land and at Grand Manan Island is as good as the opinion of those who have lived there all their lifetime 3–A. I consider that my opinion and my means of information are as good as theirs. - By Mr. Trescot: Q. In giving your testimony before the Commissioners, you do not mean to give it as a practical fisherman 2–A. No ; not at all. Q. You give it as a man representing a house which has been in the business for 60 years. You give your testimony, as I understand it, as a cotton-buyer would give his experience of dealing in cotton. He knows the brands, the qualities, and the places from which the cotton comes; and his views would be based on that sort of information. Now, With regard to this question about the fishery, you have expressed the Opinion that in winter it is not exclusively an inshore fishery, and Mr. 2710 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Thomson has submitted the opinion of Mr. McLaughlin as opposed to this view; and I want to read the opinion of an overseer, Mr. Cunning- ham, of the Inner Bay, and see whether it agrees with yours. It is as follows: - The winter herring fishery, I am sorry to say, shows a decrease from the yield of last year. This, I believe, is owing to the large quantities of nets—in fact miles of . them—being set by United States fishermen all the way from Grand Manan to Le- preaux, and far out in the bay by the Wolves, sunk from 20 to 25 fathoms, which kept the fish from coming into the bay. As they are fishing far off shore, a week at a time, this destructive practice can be followed with impunity and without fear of detection. - A. That is correct; that is what the fishermen are complaining of. Q. With regard to what is called the Gloucester herring fleet, to which reference has been made here once or twice—are you aware Or not whether this fleet takes out licenses to touch and trade when they come to buy herring at Newfoundland, or at Grand Manan, in New Brunswick 7–A. I do not know anything about that matter. No. 60. WILLIAM DAVIs, master mariner and fisherman, of Gloucester, Mass., was called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster: Question. You are seventy-one years of age?—Answer. Yes. Q. When did you first go fishing for mackerel in the Gulf of St. Law- rence?—A. In 1838. Q. And when were you last there?—A. In 1876. Q. How many years were you there fishing in the interval 7–A.. I could not tell exactly; but I was there for a good many years. Q. You have a list of them?—A. Yes. - Q. In what schooner were you there last year?—A. The B. D. HaS- kins. Q. How long were you there in her?—A. About three months. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you then catch?—A. One hundred. Q. What was your share in money?—A. Twenty-six dollars. Q. For three months' work?—A. Yes. Q. You were also there in 1872?—A. Yes. - Q. And you were there during a good many years between 1855 and 1867 ?–A. Yes. * Q. Will you state to the Commission where you used to fish during those years, and where you caught your fish 2 I want you particularly to mention the places within the three miles of the shore where you used to fish or try to fish”—A. I cannot name a great many places within three miles of the shore. Q. Where did you use to go to fish in the bay ?—A. The first year I was there we caught what we did get, and that was not a great many, on Banks Bradley and Orphan. Q. What were your principal fishing-grounds?—A. These were Banks Bradley and Orphan, and the Magdalen Islands. Q. Where did you ever fish inshore in the bay within the three-mile limit?—A. I so fished some little at Margaree, although I never Was fortunate enough to catch any mackerel there save very few. Q. How near the main-land and how near the island did you fish at AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2711 Margaree?—A. We fished some pretty near the island when we did fish there. Q. Did you ever fish in the Bend of Prince Edward Island?—A. Yes, SOme. • * - Q. When you did so, how far from the shore were you in the habit of fishing 2—A. Well, I have fished there 5 and 6 and 10 miles off shore, but I do not think that I ever caught any mackerel there within the three-mile limit. We were generally pretty shy of the bend of the island. Q. Why?—A. On account of it being a rather bad place for getting Caught in with an on-shore wind. It is a rather dangerous place. By Mr. Davies: & Q. Did you ever fish much on the American coast 2—A. Yes, in my young days, Q. But of late years, and since 1855, you preferred to come down to the bay to fish 7–A. No ; not always. Q. But generally was not this the case?—A. Yes, I did prefer coming to the bay to fish with the hook and line. Q. Did you ever try in the Bay of Chaleurs?—A. Yes. I was in there OH Cé. Q. What was the average of the catches which you made since you came to the Bay of St. Lawrence to fish 3—A. I have not figured them up, but these catches were not very large. I was not very lucky. Q. You have been rather unfortunate on your fishing trips ?—A. Yes. Q. And you never fished within 3 miles of land in the bay ?—A. I would not say that. Q. You never caught any there to speak of 3–A. Yes. I do not say that I did not catch anything within the three-mile limit, but I got very few there. Q. You fought shy of the Bend of Prince Edward Island 2–A. Well, that is so. No. 61. WILLIAM. O. COOK, fisherman, of Gloucester, Mass., was called on be- half of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster: º Question. How old are you ?—Answer. 48. Q. When did you first fish for mackerel in the Gulf of St. Lawrence?— A. In 1849, I think. - Q. During how many years were you fishing in the gulf?—A. 7. Q. Which years were those?—A. They are included from 1849 to 1861, I think. Q. What was the course you usually took when fishing for mackerel in the bay during this period 2—A. We usually first fished on Banks Orphan and Bradley, and afterwards at the Magdalen Islands; from thence we went and fished half-way across between the Magdalen Islands and the Cape Breton shore; this used to be our fishing-ground when I first went to the bay. Q. How long did you stay there ?—A. We used to cruise around there along in October. Q. And where did you go in October 2—A. We then cruised on the Cape Breton shore, keeping broad off from it. ~ : Q. Did you fish during any part of the autumn off the Bend of Prince Edward Island?—A. O, yes, we have fished off there, but nowhere within the three-mile limit. Q. Did you usually fish there ?—A. No. 2712 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. You say that in the autumn you usually went to the Cape Breton shore ?—A. Yes. - - Q. What was your harbor there ?—A. Port Hood. Q. When you made Port Hood your harbor, how long did you fish in the vicinity ?—A. Sometimes a fortnight and sometimes three weeks. Q. When did you usually leave the Magdalen Islands to go over in the vicinity of Port Hood 2–A. We usually left there about the 1st or the middle of October. Q. How near the main-land and how near Margaree Island were you in the habit of fishing when you were in the vicinity of Port Hood"— A. I think that sometimes we fished near Margaree Island, but when the cutters used to be there we used to fish broad off. Q. What is the greatest number of mackerel that you ever caught within 3 miles of the shore, either of the island or main-land, at Mar- garee?—A. As near as I can recollect, this was in 1856, when we caught 15 wash barrels about half-way between Mabou and Margaree Islands. Q. Were you in the gulf when the cutters were there ?—A. Yes. Q. Do you remember any conversation taking place with the cap- tain of a cutter as to where you might fish 7–A. He told us that we could fish three miles from the land. Q. In what depth of water 7—A. Twelve fathoms. Q. What did he tell you about fishing in 12 fathoms of water 2—A. He told us to stand off in 12 fathoms of water, and that we would then be clear of the land. - Q. Where was this 2—A. Off New London Head. Q. What was the name of this captain?—A. I do not remember. Q. Do you remember the year when this took place”—A. It was either in 1851 or 1852—I forget which. By Mr. Davies: Q. I suppose that when you would be in 12 fathoms of water off there, you would be about three miles from land 7–A.. I could not tell you that. I thought by the looks of it, this was pretty near in. Q. And he told you to go off in 12 fathoms of water. I understood you to say that at Cape Breton you used to make Port Hood your har- borº–A. Yes. * Q. Did you stay there every night 2—A. No. * Q. How often did you go in there 4–A. When it was stormy we some- times went in there, and sometimes we anchored off Margaree Island. Q. In the month of October, you did not fish near the Magdalen Isl- ands at all 2–A. O, I have been there late in October. Q. Was this the case as a rule 3—A. I do not know about a rule, but I have fished there in October. - - Q. You stated in answer to Mr. Foster that when October came you cruised around the Cape Breton shore?—A. Well, that was during part of October—not the 1st of October. During part of the month we did so. Q. When, as a rule, did you leave the Magdalen Islands to go to the Cape Breton shore ?—A. I have staid around there until the 10th and the 15th of October. Q. That was the extreme limit of your stay there?—A. I could not Say for certain, but that is the case as near as I can remember. Q. When did you generally leave the Magdalen Islands and go towards i. Cape Breton shore ?—A. I think about the 10th or the 15th of Oc-, tober. Q. Do you state this to be the general time when you left there ?—A. Yes; we always were around there about the 10th, and sometimes the 5th and the 15th or the 20th of October. * AWARD OF TEIE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2713 Q. You left there from the 5th to the 20th of October 2—A. Yes. Q. And the remainder of the season you spent off the Cape Breton shore?—A. We did not spend the whole time there; we might start off and go somewhere else. Q. Does the weather become blowy about the Magdalen Islands about that period 3–A. Some years that is the case, and some years it is not. Q. I suppose that during the years you were on our coast during the Reciprocity Treaty you fished inshore and off shore and everywhere?— A. There was nothing to stop us doing so, but we could not catch any fish inshore. There was nothing to catch inshore. Q. Did you then take particular notice whether you caught your fish in or off shore ?—A.. I think we did. Q. Why?—A. I do not know, but we talked the matter over among ourselves, as to how and where we caught our mackerel. Q. Did you catch many mackerel near Margaree?—A. No ; I do not think that we did. Q. Do you mean to tell the Commission that the mackerel caught off Margaree are not caught within three miles of the island or within three miles of the shore ?—A. I have caught mackerel inside of the three-mile limit off Margaree Island. - - Q. When you had the right to fish in there, did you not go within the three-mile limit 3–A. Yes; I say we did so. - Q. Was it not your habit and custom to fish within three miles of the shore during the Reciprocity Treaty 2–A. No. We used to fish off shore. - # Q. What, then, did you mean by telling Mr. Foster that you fished near Margaree, and that when the cutters were there you fished broad off?—A. And when the cutters were not there I fished inshore ? Q. That would be the inference 2—A. I said that when the cutters were there, I fished broad offshore. Q. I presume from this that when the cutters were not there, you fished inside the three-mile limit 3–A. I do not know about that. Q. Is that correct 7–A. We always used to fish offshore, and inshore too. Q. Did you take out licenses?—A. We did not. Q. Were you in the bay during the license years 7–A. Yes. Q. During what years were you there ? You said that you fished in the bay from 1849 to 1861—then you were not there during the license years 3–A. No. Q. What were your average catches in the bay?—A. 150 and 250 barrels; and some years 300 barrels; and one year our catch was 600 barrels; all of which we caught on Banks Bradley and Orphan. Q. When was this?—A. In 1860. - Q. You do not know anything about fishing in the bay since 1861?— A. No. - Q. Or whether the fish have of late years been taken in their old haunts or not ?—A. No. Q. What was the size of the vessel in which you took that large catch 7–A. 118 tons. Q. Did you ever fish about Seven Islands 2—A. No. Q. And you never fished much about Prince Edward Island 3–A. No, not a great deal; and I never fished any to the nor’ard of Banks Orphan and Bradley. Q. Did you fish there outside of four or five miles from the shore ?— A. We used to fish there so as just to see New London Head ; and We fished from there to North Cape. 2714 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. And that would be in 12 fathoms of water 2—A. We would be pretty near in when in 12 fathoms of water. - Q. You did fish there off shore ?—A. Yes; we did. Q. But were you accustomed to fish there? Was it one of the fishing grounds or haunts which you frequented ?–A. No ; we used to go to the Magdalen Islands to get big mackerel. t Q. And after they were done, and if you were not successful there, you went to these other places?—A. We used to go to Banks Bradley and Orphan, and to Bird Rocks. * Q. When you were not successful there do you mean to say that you did not try off Prince Edward Island 2–A. We used to try broad off Shore there—in sight of land. - - Q. I am not speaking of the limits; but did you not try off Prince Edward Island every year 7—A. We fished there broad offshore. - Q. Never mind that ; but every year you fished there?—A. I say we used to fish there so that we could see the land; we fished up and down broad off the land; we would be about 25 or 26 miles off. Q. Did you do so every year?—A. No; we did not. In 1860 we fished altogether off the Magdalen Islands and off Bird Rocks. Q. That was for one year?—A. Yes; and in 1856 also we fished there altogether. Q. With the exception of these two years, you fished every year off Prince Edward Island?—A. Well, we used to fish there broad offshore So as to see land ; we did not like to go in. - Q. What then induced you to have a conversation with the captain of a cutter respecting the distance off shore, where and in what number of fathoms you should fish 7–A. We did so because we wanted to find that out so as to satisfy ourselves. Q. If you never fished off there save at a distance of 20 or 21 miles from land what earthly necessity could there be for making such an inquiry at all 3—A. We had nothing to go by so as to tell what distance we were from land. Q. Do you mean to tell the Commission that although you fished 21 miles off shore there was any necessity to inquire of a captain of a cut- ter in how many fathoms of water you should fish, so as not to fish Within three miles of the shore ?—A. If we fished in toward the limits, We Wanted to know when we would be safe. - Q. Why did you want to know the exact depth of water in which to fish 3–A. We saw the captain of the cutter when we were going in, and some wanted to heave to and fish, while others urged that we should ask him about it. Q. And you never caught any fish inshore?—A. I did not say that We did. - - Q. Why did you wish to know the exact limit”—A. I never caught any fish inside the limit there ; but I have done so on the Cape Breton shore. Q. Why did you want to know the exact distance at which you Should fish off New London Head 3–A. We wanted to satisfy our minds and know where the limit was. . No. 62. EDWARD HILL, fisherman, of Gloucester, Mass., was called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster: Question. How old are you?—Answer. I am 56. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2715 Q. When did you first fish in the Gulf of St. Lawrence?—A. In 1850. Q. During how many years altogether have you fished for mackerel in the gulfº-A. 14. Q. When did you last fish there ?—A. In 1869. \ Q. What were your principal fishing grounds when fishing for mack- erel in the gulf?—A. These were about the Magdalen Islands, and be- tween them and Cape Breton, and on Banks Bradley and Orphan. Q. Did you ever fish off the bend of Prince Edward Island 2–A. No ; near North Cape and about 10 miles off was the closest in that I have been off the island; but we never tried there. g Q. Where have you fished the nearest to the shore in the gulf º–A. Off Margaree. - - Q. When did you go there usually 3–A. In October. Q. Were you in the gulf in October, 1850 %—A. Yes. Q. In what schooner?—A. The B. H. Collis. Q. Who was the captain 3–A. Llewellyn Reed. Q. Did you come in contact with a cutter commanded by Captain Darby ?—A. We did while we were in Port Hood. Q. I want you to relate that incident exactly as it occurred.—A. When we first got in the bay, on the first trip we went, it was in Octo- ber; about the 7th of October we went from Port Hood down to Mar- garee, and there was a man who came on board from another vessel, and Says he. “There is a Rockport vessel which has been taken by Cap- tain Darby.” Q. Come right down to what was done by Captain Darby.—A. We Caught about 25 barrels there, and then we got scared and went off Shore. When we got to Port Hood we had a good deck of mackerel. We had them all salted on deck. Captain Darby came on board, and Says he, “You have a fine lot of fish; I want to see your papers.” He took them on board the cutter, and said to the captain, “Come on board in about an hour's time; we will talk it over.” The next thing, our cap- tain came on board, and says he, “I have compromised with him by giving him 20 barrels of mackerel, and,” says he, “a little pinkey will Come alongside for them.” We thought that this was in charge of the captain's brother, but I have heard since that this was not the case. We took the fish off our deck, and struck them down into his hold, and off he Went; and he gave us permission to strike the mackerel down. Q. What do you mean by striking them down 2–A. Heading them up and stowing them in the hold. F3y Mr. Thomson : Q. That was in 1850 or 1851?—A. It was in 1850. Q. You had been fishing in Margaree Harbor ?—A. We had been fish- ing off Mabou. - - Q. You had been fishing within three miles of the land 2–A. We then Caught 25 barrels there. Q. Within three miles of land %–A. I do not know about that; the land is very high at Mabou, and it is hard to tell the distance exactly. No cutter was there, but only this little boat, which informed Captain Darby of it. Q. Will you now undertake to swear that you did not catch those 25 barrels within three miles of the shore?—A. Well, I am not certain about it; the distance off shore might have been three or four miles. Q. Will you positively swear that you did not take them within three miles of land 2–A. No. Q. How many barrels of mackerel had you then on hand 2—A 140. 2716 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Where had you caught the rest ?—A. Broad offshore, about 20 miles off; between that point and Entry Island, of the Magdalen Islands. Q. Then you got frightened and ran off to Port Hood"—A. We got º full and it breezed up and we had to run to Port Hood for a harbor. Q. Where were these 25 barrels lying?—A. On the deck along with the rest. Q. When you catch mackerel, do you not dress them and put them at once into barrels 7–A. No, not until we get all we can into the barrels and until they are fairly struck. We leave them for 24 hours generally and then head them up and strike them down. * What do you call fairly Struck 7–A. Salted so that they will not Shrink. - Q. As soon as you catch them you salt them 3–A. As soon as we get them we let them soak in water for perhaps two or three hours, if we have good weather. g Q. You then open them 3–A. We then dress them. Q. How was it with these 25 barrels”—A. They were on deck along With the rest. Q. Were these fish lying in water on deck 2–A. They were all salted When we reached Port Hood. Q. And they were in barrels 7–A. Yes. Q. Were they headed up 7–A. No. yº. And you saw Captain Darby after you came to Port Hood"—A. Y €S. - Q. You were then in the harbor 7—A. Yes. Q. Was it foul weather when he came on board and took your papers? —A. He came on board and got the papers from the skipper, and he then went back to his cutter and told the captain to come in about an hour's time, and he did so. Q. Who was your captain 3–A. Llewellyn Reed. Q. Where is he now %–A. He is in Gloucester, working as a teamster. Q. Your captain went on board of the cutter ?—A. Yes; and he stopped there, I suppose, about half an hour, when he came back. “Well,” says he, “I have got the papers, and we have permission to head them up, and stow them down”; and says he, “I have got to give him 20 barrels of mackerel to compromise for the papers.” Q. Then I understood you to say that Captain Darby came down to your vessel, took away the papers, told the captain to come on board of the cutter, and about half an hour after he went, your captain came back, and said he had compromised with Captain Darby, of the cutter, by giving him 20 barrels of mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. What kind of mackerel were they 3–A. Number ones, and good Ones—very good ones. Q. Were these taken on board of the cutter?—A. They were put on board of the small pinkey; he had a little spy there, and he spied us out. Q. Was the pinkey the spy Ž–A. Yes. Q. How much did this pinkey get 2—A.. I could not tell you anything about how they settled her hash. & Q. What became of the fish 3–A. They were put on board of the pinkey. Other vessels had to give him some. The Reindeer, of New- buryport—I recollect it the same as if it had happened but yesterday— took 2 barrels alongside the cutter, but Captain Darby was somewhere on shore, or on board of some other vessel, at the time; they asked if Captain Darby was on board, and the answer was, “No”; then said the mate, “What have you got ?” “We have 2 barrels of mackerel here to AWARD OF THE FISEHERY COMMISSION. 2717 give us permission to stow our mackerel down.” “Well,” says the mate, “this is tall”; and they took on board the mackerel. Q. As one of the crew, you were entitled to your share ?–A. I lost my share of that catch. We did not know whose mackerel were taken. We do not put our private mark on them until they are headed up. “ Q. How did you tell them 7–A. We had them separated. I told the Skipper not to mix them all up, but to take part of each man’s catch. Q. How could you tell whose catch it was 7–A. We have them all Separated, and a space left between. Q. Then you knew what barrels belonged to each of the crew 2–A. No ; because he mixed them all up—he was so agitated and scared. Q. That was before the cutter got hold of them at all?–A. We had them all right before the cutter got hold of them. Q. Were they all headed up 3—A. No ; but they were in barrels, the fish being piled up, and heaping over to a considerable extent, when Captain Darby came on board. Q. You mean that the barrels were full?—A. Yes; and heaped up. Q. That was all done when you were running from Margaree to Port Hood 3–A. No ; we proceeded to salt them in Port Hood. We had them all in salt barrels; we were all night dressing them; and by the time we got to Port Hood we had them all split, gutted, and in water; We then commenced to salt them ; and when we had all but 2 barrels Salted we saw the cutter coming. Q. To whom did these three barrels belong 2—A. I could not tell. Q. Had they been kept separate 7—A. We had them all salted but those. - Q. Do you know to whom these 2 barrels belonged?—A. No ; I could not tell exactly. Q. Did you know at the time 2—A. No. Q. Then the fish were all mixed up at that time?—A. We do not look out for each other's mackerel, but for our own; and I looked out for IIll Il G. Q. Had any salt been put in these barrels at the time?—A. All my fish were then under salt. gº Q. Were they in barrels 7–A. Yes. Q. You knew your own barrels 3–A. Yes—if they have not been dis- turbed; I knew them as they were when I put them up, before they Were disturbed. Q. How could they be disturbed when once in the barrels?—A. The barrels were shifted round. The skipper got excited. Q. What were they shifted round for 2 Were they not shifted round because the officer of the cutter came on board?—A. After the skipper . from the cutter he took anything and everything, he was so ex- cited. Q. You mean that he slung the barrels about 2—A. He took them as they came and headed them up himself; that is, what Captain Darby got—the rest were not headed up. Q. How many barrels of mackerel had you on board besides those Which you gave to Captain Darby ?—A. We had 140 on deck and in the hold before we gave him any. Q. If you had really been fishing within 3 miles of the shore, and you cannot swear that you were not, he let you off pretty easily, instead taking your whole cargo and your vessel besides?—A. He took just what We caught inshore. Q. That was getting off pretty easily º–A. That was the first year I Was in the bay. t 2718 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. You do not know what took place between your captain and Cap- tain Darby ?—A. No ; I do not. - # Q. You do not know whether your captain told him fairly enough that he had caught 20 barrels within the limits 2—A. No ; I could not say as to that. Q. As you say, he just took the fish which you had caught within the limits. Now I will ask you fairly if that was not letting you off a great deal easier than you deserved, considering the fact that you had forfeited the vessel and all that was in it 3–A. I do not know about that ; it was kind of hard. Q. Would it not have been kind of harder if the vessel and all the rest of the cargo had been taken 3–A. O, yes; of course. Q. Now, were you not very glad to get off as you did; that spy, the pinkey, was too much for you ?—A.. I told them that I would fight for my mackerel before I would give them up. ſº Q. That is the only experience you have had with the cutters ?—A. Yes. Q. I think that Captain Darby let you off wonderfully easy in only taking the fish which you had no business to catch, such as were Brit- ish subjects. During all these fourteen years it seems that you never got nearer than within 10 miles of Prince Edward Island?—A. O, yes; I have been there myself within five and six miles of the shore. Q. I thought that you never got nearer than within 10 miles of it 3–A. I took out a license Onge. Q. When was this?—A. In 1866; but it did not pay. There were no mackerel inshore. 4: Q. Had you fished before 1866 within the limits 2—A. Well, I might have fished within four or five miles or so of the land; perhaps I might have done so, but I could not say. I caught them wherever I could get them. I was, however, rather skittish about going in there, because I owned the best part of the vessel myself, and I would not run any risks. Q. But you did so sometimes 3–A. I thought I was outside then. Q. Do I understand you to say that you never meant to get in With- in the three-mile limit at any time 7–A. Not when I owned the vessel myself; only the year when I took out the license, I fished wherever I had a mind to. Q. You were afraid of the cutters?—A. Yes; if I had lost my vessel, I had lost my all. Q. And you would not risk it 3–A. No. Q. During those years when you kept outside of the three-mile limit, did you get pretty good fares 3–A. Yes. - Q. Very good ones 3–A. Yes; very good indeed. Q. How many barrels would your vessel take 2–A. One would only take 267 barrels. Q. In all these trips that you made, did you get full fares 2—A. Not all ; in 1869 and in 1867 I did not get full fares. - Q. Before 1866, did you ever fish inshore ?—A. No ; but I caught 295 barrels just in sight of Entry Island. I got my whole trip off there. I was never inshore at all during that trip. Q. If in previous trips you had managed to get full trips off Shore, what induced you in 1866 to pay for a license 3–A.. I wanted the chance of fishing inshore or offshore, as I might wish. Q. What was your object in paying out money for a license, if pre- viously you had got full fares outside 7–A. Sometimes the fishing at Margaree fails, and sometimes there is a school of mackerel there, or So I had been told, for I never saw them there myself. I daresn’t go in. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2719 Q. The fact of the matter is, that the mackerel are sometimes, accord- ing to your idea, out in the bay, and sometimes they school inshore; is it not then a privilege to be able to follow them inshore ?—A. Yes. Q. And the people who have that privilege are better off than those who have it not ; the former have a better chance of securing fares?— A. Well, I do not know about that. I could not say that, because I found the mackerel more plentiful offshore than inshore. Q. How much did you pay for the license 2–A. 50 cents a ton. Q. What was the tonnage of your vessel ?—A. 49. Q. Why did you pay $24,50 for a license, having no object for doing so 2–A. I did it so that I could fish where I had a mind to, and so that if I found them inshore I could catch them there. Q. And always before that you had found plenty of mackerel in the body of the bay 7–A. Yes. Q. You never previously fished within the limits at all ?—A. Yes; I did so in 1851. * Q. Did you fish inshore in 1851 %–A. Yes. Q. Did you get good fares that year?—A. We caught, perhaps, 40 or 50 barrels inshore towards the last of our fishing. * Q. When were you last in the bay ?–A. In 1869. - Q. I suppose that you have heard that the mackerel have kept inshor much more of late years than was formerly the case ?—A. No ; I do not know anything about it, because the vessels have not been doing any- thing. . All the Vessels say that they have not been doing anything at all. - Q. Have you heard that the mackerel have kept inshore of late years more than they did previously 3–A. No ; I have not. Q. Then in all those voyages you never went inshore to fish, except in 1851 and in 1866, when you took out a license?—A. No ; not inside the limits. Q. You kept off shore all the time 2—A. Yes. º Q. Did you get full fares all the time 2—A. I did not get full fares in 1869 and 1867. e Q. And yet you did not try inshore at all?—A. No; because the ves- Sels which went inshore did not get anything. - *. Q. And you would not try inshore?—A.. I would not run the risk. Q. Did you ever fish in the Bay of Chaleurs?—A. No ; never. Q. Have you never heard that good fishing was to be had on the northern shore of Prince Edward Island 2–A. No. Q. You never have 3–A. No. sº Q. Not from any one º–A. No. I went round the island once. Q. You have never heard from anybody that there is good fishing along the northern shore of Prince Edward Island, within the three-mile limit 3–A. No. * Q. Well, then, in your opinion the privilege of fishing within three miles of the shore along the British coasts is of no value at all to Amer- i. *hermen *—A. It is not a great deal of value to them, I should think. * Q. Is it of any value 2—A. I suppose it is some at times. I suppose there are times when the vessels themselves would benefit by it. Q. Was it so in 1854 and before 1854 * You recollect when the Re- Ciprocity Treaty was entered into ?—A. Yes. Q. Was it a privilege then 3–A. I was not in the bay then. Q. You were there in 1850 and 1851 ?—A. Yes. Q. Were you there in 1852 and 1853%–A. No. Q. When were you next in the bay ?—A. In 1855, I believe. 27.20 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Did you fish in the bay at all during the Reciprocity Treaty, from 1854 to 1866%—A. Yes, I did so in 1858. \ Q. Did you fish inshore then 7–A. We tried inshore and got five bar- rels of mackerel in August, off Cape George, with a seine. . Q. Where is Cape George º–A. It is before you get to Pictou. Q. Did you not fish along the shore of Prince Edward Island last year 3–A. No. Q. Or off Margaree ?—A. No. Q. Did you get a full fare then 2–A. No, nor half a fare. Q. You then knew that you had a right to go inshore and fish 7–A. No, I did not know anything about it, nor did the captain, Q. I understand you to say that you went there in 1858 and did not know that you had a right to go and fish within three miles of the shore? —A. I did not. Q. You did not know that the Reciprocity Treaty was in force and that it gave you a right to fish where you pleased ?–A. No ; I was a hand then. - - Q. Did you understand from the captain that the reason he kept off shore was because he was afraid of the cutters?—A. No ; he was not afraid of the cutters. - Q. Why did you not go inshore?—A. If he saw mackerel in or off shore he would have Seined them. ^- Q. You did not get a full fare ?—A. No. Q. When did you enter the bay ?—A. About the last of July. Q. And when did you go out 7–A. The last of October. Q. You only made one trip 7–A. Yes. Q. Where were you fishing all that time 2—A. Broad off shore and on Bank Bradley. * Q. Broad off shore ?—A. Between the Magdalen Islands and Cape Breton. Q: Were you fishing near East Point, Prince Edward Island?—A. No, We did not go near East Point, but we were off North Cape once. Q. You were not broad off East Point at all?—A. No ; but the vessel was broad off between the Magdalen Islands and Cape Breton. Q. When was this 2—A. In 1858. Q. And yet you did not know that you had then a right to go inshore to fish 3–A. I did not mind anything about it. Q. Why did you not suggest it to the captain since you were interest- ed in getting a full fare?—A. I had nothing at all to say in the matter. Q. You were a sharesman?—A. Yes. , * - Q. Why, then, did you not suggest to the captain to go and fish in- shore off Prince Edward Island?—A. He might have told me to mind my own business. • Q. But this was your business?—A. If a man, while I was skipper, said anything like that to me, I would tell him to mind his own business, and that I would attend to my own. Q. Is it not the business of a sharesman to do so 3–A. No ; they are On what we call half lines. - * Q. Then, in 1858, although you had the right to fish inshore, you ab- solutely kept out in the middle of the bay, only got half a fare, and staid there from July to October 2—A. We tried inshore at Cape George, and we thought our luck would be the same at other places. By Mr. Foster: Q. Did you ever try seining in the gulf?—A. Yes; in 1858, 1859, and 1860, in one vessel. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2721 Q. With what success %—A. Very little indeed. Q. Those were the years when you got these poor fares?—A. Yes; we each made about $75 the whole summer. Q. What sort of seines did you use 7–A. The purse-Seine. Q. Did you do so as early as 1858%—A. Yes; we had them on Our shore. Q. You were at Seven Islands 2—A. Yes, with purse-Seines, but got nothing. We stopped a good while there and we thus threw a great deal of our time away. Q. You thus seined in 1858, 1859, and 1860 ?—A. Yes; we were at . Seven Islands in 1858. Q. What was the name of your schooner and the name of the Cap- tain 3–A. The former was named the Potomac, and the latter, Nehemiah Adams, Q. That was quite early for purse-seines?—A. We had purse Seines for pogies and mackerel years before that at home; that is the Way in . which we catch pogies altogether on our shore. I have seen Vessels belonging to this place at Seven Islands, which stopped until fall and . Came away without a barrel. No. 63. JOHN CONLEY, Jr., fisherman, of Rockport, Mass., was called on be. half of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Dana : Question. What is your age %–Answer. It is 43. Q. You have lived in Gloucester nearly all your life 3–A. Yes; with the exception of 10 years, during which I have lived in Rockport. Q. Is this place in a different customs district 7–A. No ; we have al deputy collector at Rockport, but we have to go to Gloucester to get, Our papers. Q. When did you first fish in the Bay of St. Lawrence?—A. In 1854. Q. What was the name of the vessel in which you were that year 7— A. The C. C. Davis. Q. You made one trip that year 7—A. Yes. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you catch 2—A. 175. Q. Were they caught off or in shore ?—A. They were taken offshore. Q. All of them 3–A. All with the exception of a few barrels, perhaps five, which were caught inshore. - Q. In what vessel were you in 1855?–A. The Racer. We made one trip. - Q. How many barrels did you catch 7–A. 250. Q. Where did you first fish?—A. On Bank Bradley. Q. And then 2–A. We next went down to the Magdalen Islands. Q. How much of these 250 barrels did you catch at the Magdalen Islands 2—A. We got almost the whole of them there. . . Q. Where did you catch the rest ?—A. Around East Point and scat- tered along the shore. Q. In 1855 you had the right to fish where you liked 3–A. Yes. Q. And you knew that %–A. Yes. f Q. Did you attempt inshore fishing 2—A. Yes. Q. And you think that you gave it a fair trial 7–A. Yes. Q. What portion of your entire cargo did you catch inside of three miles of the shore that year?—A. Perhaps 15 barrels out of the 250. Q. Were you in the bay in 1866?—A. Yes; in the Belvidere. 171 F 2722 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. How many barrels did you catch 7–A. 200. Q. What portion of these were caught inside the three-mile limit 3– A. 7 or 8 barrels; we fished on Bank Bradley and along the Escuminac shore, off the west coast. Q. Were you in the bay or on our shore in 1857 ?—A. I was then on Our Shore. Q. What were you doing 2—A. Seining. Q. How many barrels did you take"—A. About 500. Q. That was the best business you had yet done 7–A. Yes. Q. On what part of the American coast did you fish 7–A. From Mount Desert to Cape Cod. ! - *} Q. In what vessel were you in 1858%–A. The Sarah B. Harris; I then made my first experience as master. - Q. How many trips did you make to the bay in 1858 %–A. Two. - Q. What did you catch 3––A. 130 barrels on the first and 170 barrels On the second. * Q. Where did you catch the 130 barrels?—A. At the Magdalen Islands. Q. Where did you make your second trip º–A. At the Magdalen Islands and at Margaree—broad off Margaree Island. Q. How many of these 300 barrels do you think were caught within 3 miles of the shore ?—A. Well, as weſi as I could judge, we might have SO caught 15 barrels. Q. Were you in the bay in 1859%—A. Yes; in the Trenton. Q. Were you mackerel or cod fishing 2—A. I was cod-fishing one trip and mackereling one trip. You were first cod-fishing 7–A. Yes. Where ?—A. On Banks Orphan and Bradley. Were you successful ?—A. Yes. - Where did you make your second trip"—A. In the bay, formackerel. What did you then catch 2—A. About 145 barrels. . Where did you get them 3–A. We caught the most of them off Cape George, on Fisherman's Bank. Q. Did you catch any portion of them within three miles of the Coast 3–A. Yes. Q. About what portion ?—A. 10 or 12 barrels, I should judge; they were caught around Pomouet Island. Q. What did you do in 1860?—A. I was banking. . Cod-fishing 2—A. Yes. . Did you do well?—A. Yes; very well, indeed. . Did you go into the bay the same year 7—A. No ; I did not again go into the bay until 1862. i § I Q. In 1861 you were on the American coast 2—A. Yes. Q. Mackereling 2—A. Yes. Q. Seining 2—A. Yes. - - Q. How many barrels did you take 2–A. 500, I think. Q. Where were you in 1862?—A. In the bay, in the schooner Roger Williams. - Q. How many trips did you make?—A. Two. Q. How much did you get 2—A. 300 barrels each trip. Q. Where did you catch them?—A. Most of them at Magdalen Islands. º - Q. Any portion of them inshore?—A. Yes. Q. What portion, do you think?—A. Probably we got 20 barrels in- Shore. Q. In 1863 where were you?—A. On our shores. From that time up AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2723 to 1872, ten years, I was fishing on our shores—mackerel-fishing in small boats. Q. Were not the 10 years from 1866 to 1876?–A. No. Q. In 1863 what did you do?—A. I was in the Franklin F. Schank. Q. Where did you go first 3–A. To the Grand Banks. Q. Did you go into the bay at all ?—A. Yes, in the fall. Q. What did you catch?—A. 160 barrels of mackerel. Q. Where did you catch them?—A. At Magdalen Islands and East Point. § How many of those do you think you took inshore ?—A. 15 bar- TelS. - Q. Where did you catch them 2–A. Right off Red Head, at Souris. Q. Were you close in?—A. Yes. Q. How did you catch them ?—A. It was blowing fresh at the time, and We Sprung up and caught them. Q. In 1864 where were you?—A. On our shores. Q. Cod-fishing 2—A. Yes. * Q. How many trips did you make 2–A. Our trips were short. Q. How many pounds or quintals did you get for the whole season 7– A.. I made two trips and got 145,000 pounds each trip. Q. Was that being very successful ?–A. Yes. Q. Take 1865—on the first trip did you go to the Banks or bay ?—A. To the Banks. Q. Did you do well there?—A. Yes. - Q. What else did you do that year 7–A. I did not do anything. Q. Did you catch any haddock 3–A. I think we did a little haddock- ing, but nothing to speak of that year. Q. From 1866 to 1876 you were on the American shore ?—A. Yes. Q. Did you go into the bay at all ?—A. No. Q. What were you engaged in 3–A. In market fishing, for Boston market, for haddock or mackerel or any fish we could catch. Q. You are out but a day or two 3–A. We make short trips, some- times two trips a week, sometimes one trip. Q. For fresh fish 7–A. Yes. - Q. You have never done any fishing with pounds and nets on shore?— A. No. Q. During the ten years from 1866 to 1876 you were fishing on the American shore—were you successful ?—A. Yes, successful. Q. How did you succeed during the 10 years you were fishing on the American coast compared with the long period you were in the bay ?— A. I think it was a little better than, it was in the bay. Q. You were in the bay from 1855 to 1865, during the Reciprocity Treaty, and there was nothing to prevent you fishing where you pleased. Do you think you gave a fair trial to the inshore fisheries?—A. Yes. Q. What is the result of your experience during those 10 years you were in the bay as to the inshore fishing compared with the fishing out- side?—A. As far as my own experience goes, I never reaped much benefit from the inshore fishing.. Q. And yet you tried it 3–A. Yes, often. Q. Taking the bay fishing as a whole, do you think the right to fish within three miles adds much to its value?—A. It did not to me, to my fishing. Q. That is your experience %–A. Yes. «» Q. You have been cod-fishing a good while 7–A. Yes. Q. Have you used fresh bait"—A. Yes. Q. And fished with salt bait 3–A, Yes. 2724. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Take the result of your experience. Do you think it would be more beneficial as regards the pecuniary results of the trips to go in for fresh bait or to take salt bait, and rely on what fresh bait you can catch at the Banks and stay out 3–A. To stay out would be more profitable to me. - - Y Q. You admit that fresh bait is better side by side than salt bait 2–A. €S. Q. Then what is the reason why you think it is better to stay out with Salt bait º–A. On account of the time you lose in going in and the money it costs to get it. * Q. To get it and keep it.”—A. Yes. Q. Did you find it pretty expensive 3–A.. I found it very expensive. By Mr. Davies: Q. For the last sixteen years you have been fishing on your own shores, catching fresh fish for market?—A. Some parts of the season I have. - - - Q. Have you been cod-fishing portions of the seasons?—A. Yes. Q. Have you been on the Banks 7–A. Yes. - Q. From 1866 to 1876 I believe you were off your own coast catching fresh fish for market?—A. Yes. -- * > Q. So that for those ten years you know nothing of the mode of fish- ing on the Banks from personal experience %—A. No. Q. Previous to ten years ago, the system of fishing with fresh bait had not come into vogue, had it 3–A. Yes, I think it had before ten years ago. - - - Q. Do you think that before ten years ago Bank codfishermen were accustomed to take fresh bait or to run in to the coast for it 2—A. Yes. Q. Did you ever try it yourself?—A. Yes. Q. Where did you go for fresh bait 2–A. Round Cape Sable, and round to a place called Pubnico. Q. Did you fish on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland at all ?—A. Not at that time. - Q. You never fished with fresh bait there 7–A. No. Q. You don’t know anything about running into Newfoundland for fresh bait 3–A. No. - Q. You were on Georges Banks 2—A. Yes. Q. Did you run in from Georges Bank for fresh bait 2–A. Yes. º V6 you got any memorandum of the results of the voyages 3– A. NO. Q. You cannot remember them 3–A. No ; I did not think it was nec- essary. Q. And you cannot tell, of course, what the results were ?—A. No. Q. And therefore you don’t know whether one was better than the other?—A. I remember going into Cape Sable for bait to go on Banquero after halibut and codfish. I cannot remember the name of the harbor Where we went ; it is a great place to go and get fresh bait. Q. How many times did you run in for fresh bait from the Georges?— A. About a dozen times. - Q. In one season 7–A. In different seasons. Q. Have you ever gone and fished on the Georges solely with salt bait 3–A. No. 9 * Q. Or anywhere else—on the Grand Banks 7–A. Yes, I have on the Grand Banks. ge nº How many seasons were you on the Grand Banks 3–A. Two or Tee. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2725 Q. When was that ?—A. I don’t remember the year; some time dur- ing the ten years. We made one trip there. We would go in the win- ter market fishing, and in the summer would make a trip to the Banks. Q. During the last 14 years you have never been in Bay St. Law. rence fishing 2—A. Ithink I was there in 1873 in the Franklin S. Schank. Q. That is a memorandum you made up from your memory º–A. Yes. Q. Refer to it again. You stated in answer to Mr. Dana that 1863 was the last year you were in the bay ?–A. Yes. - Q. Then for the last fourteen years you have not been in the bay fish- ing 2—A. No. Q. Then you know nothing about where the fish were caught during those fourteen years?—A. No. I cannot answer it exactly, because my figures don’t agree. My dates don't agree with my conscience. I have got it that I was there in 1873 in the Franklin S. Schank, and you have put it at 1863. I was in the Franklin S. Schank in 1873. Q. Then you were not in that vessel in 1863?–A. No. - Q. Where were you in 1863?—A. I must have been on our shores. I took notes of the years when I was in the bay, but of the years when I Was On Our Shore and at the Banks I did not. .. – Q. Could you from your memory state accurately what years you were in the bay?—A. My memory fails me. I have not a good mem- Ory. ! - Q. You cannot tell from memory the years you were in the bay ?—A. No, unless I were to sit down and think it over. . . - - Q. Irrespective of that one trip in the Franklin S. Schank in the fall of 1873, you have not been in the bay for fourteen years ?—A. No. . . Q. During all those years you do not pretend to say where the fish were caught 7–A. I do not. - Q. As to the Franklin S. Schank, what became of her?—A. She was owned in Rockport. Q. Was she not seized ?–A. Yes. - . . . . . . . . Q. In what year 7—A. The year she was built. I don’t remember what the year was. She was seized and went to Quebec. Q. Was she sold?—A. Yes, and the parties bought her back. Q. What was she condemned and sold for 7—A. For net fishing within the limits. * - • Q. She was sold and condemned ?–A. Yes; that was before I went in her. - Q. She was bought back and then you went in her ?—A. Yes. Q. What time of the year did you come to the bay in her on the fall trip in 1873%—A. About the 15th of September we left home. Q. I suppose you got down to the bay about the 25th 3—A. About 20th or along there. - $ a . Q. Where did you go?—A. We went to the Magdalen Islands. Q. Is it customary for vessels to go to Magdalen Islands after 25th September 3—A. It is. Q. I understood they generally left about 25th September or 1st Oc- tober 7—A. Some do not leave there till the weather blows them away. Q. When is that ?—A. When the anchors won’t hold on the bottom. Q. When is that ?—A. About the last of November. Q. Are you sure in stating that ?—A. Yes. Q. That mackerel-fishing vessels remain there till the last of Novem- ber 2—A. Yes; I staid myself. Q. In what year 2—A. I don’t remember the year. Q. You have not been there for 14 years 7–A. I know I have not. 2726 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Can you remember the name of the vessel you were in when you staid till the last of November 2—A. Roger Williams. Q. That was in 1862, was it?—A. Yes; we went adrift. We had to leave. - } Q. Can you remember the time 2—A. I cannot remember the time. Q. Was it the last of November 7—A. It was somewhere about the first. ..Q., EIow do you mean you went adrift 2—A. We never stay in the bay till the last of November. We always reckon to be out of the bay by the 10th of November. * Q. You mean the last of October 2—A. Yes. Q. Is it not the first of October they leave the Magdalen Islands 7– A. About the last. * - Q. A witness (Mr. Cook) who preceded you said that from the 5th to the 10th of October they left there. Where else did you fish that year in the Franklin S. Schank 7–A. At East Point, Prince Edward Island. Q. How did you fish there; did you go inshore and drift out 3–A. What we caught we caught to an anchor inshore. Q. Did you try fishing and drifting off?—A. Yes. , Q. Were there any vessels with you ?—A. There were not any the day we caught our mackerel. They were all in the harbor at Souris. Q. When you were fishing, drifting off the land, were there any other vessels there 4–A. Yes. Q. Lots of them 3–A. Yes. Q. How many would you say ?—A. 30 or 40 sail. Q. All engaged in the same mode of fishing 7–A. Yes. Q. Is there not a larger fleet generally found off East Point than 30 or 40 sail 3–A. Sometimes there are more, and sometimes less. Q. Sometimes a good deal larger ?—A. That was about an average that year. Q. Can you remember, leaving out the Franklin S. Schank, what pro- portion of the mackerel which you caught in the bay fourteen years ago was taken within three miles of shore ?—A. I think about one-ninth part, as near as I could judge from the little experience I had. Q. Your experience was not much 3–A. No. Q. Did you ever fish about Seven Islands 2—A. No. Q. Nor in Bay Chaleurs ?—A. No. - Q. Nor along the west shore of New Brunswick, from Miscou to Mir- michi ?—A, Off shore I have a little. Q. You have never tried within three miles of the shore ?—A. No ; not off. that shore. - - Q. Did you fish round the bend of Prince Edward Island 3–A. Yes; T have tried there. - - Q. Did you ever try within three miles of the shore, except at East Point %—A. Yes. Q. Whereabouts 7–A. Off St. Peter's, New London Head, and all along what we call the Sand Hills. Q. Did you try many times there ?—A. Different times, yes. Q. And you always tried by going in and drifting off?—A. No ; the wind would not always allow us to do that. Sometimes We would drift north and south. The wind would not always be right offshore, and it all depends on the wind. Sometimes we drifted along the shore; SOme- times from north and south ; sometimes in and sometimes out. Q. The fleet all pursued the same mode of fishing 2—A. When I was trying along there I was always alone. I never happened to be in any fleet when fishing there. - - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 27.27 Q. You never saw anybody else doing so 7–A.. I say I never tried with any fleet inside of three miles. - Q. Did you ever See any other vessels fishing in that way within three miles of the shore at the island 3–A. Yes. 1. How could you see them 3–A. They were a distance off, trying alOng. Q. There were vessels there besides you ?—A. Yes. Q. What did you mean when you said you were always alone 3–A. Away from the fleet. Q. Were there, or were there not, other vessels with you when you Were SO fishing %–A. At a distance from me. 1% What distance out 3–A. Perhaps five or six miles along the SIROI’6”. Q. How many would there be?—A. Ten or twelve going and coming, Some one way and some another. As far as my eye could see I would See Vessels. - Q. You saw vessels more or less all the time 2—A. Yes. Q. You always saw them when off the shore ?—A. Most generally. . Q. Is not the fleet accustomed to largely fish along there ?—A. When they strike mackerel they generally bunch up. When they cannot find any they go flying all around the shores. º Q. When they catch the mackerel schooling they bunch together, a good many of them 3–A. Yes. * - Q. How many ?—A. As high as 105 sail. Q. Round one School %–A. Yes. - Q. Catching mackerel off the island 2—A. I did not say off the island. Q. Did you not understand that my questions had reference to the north side of Prince Edward Island 2–A. I did not understand you to say within the three-mile limit. Q. Did you understand me to refer to the north side of the island when you spoke about the vessels being scattered about at one time, and then being together in a bunch”—A. I did. Q. When you gave your answers to me you had reference to Prince Edward Island 3–A. I said I had seen 150 sail of vessels off the coast Of the island. - Q. And every time you have been there, you have seen vessels more or less fishing off the coast 3–A. Sailing up and down and trying to fish. w Q. And have you known any fish caught there ?—A. Yes. Q. As to distances from the shore; is there much difficulty in telling the exact distance you are off shore ?—A. Yes, I should judge there was. Q. A man might think he was three miles off when he was only two and a half, or he might think he was outside the limits when he was . really very near the line of the limits, might he 3—A. Yes. The way I have always found it is this: if we thought we were a mile and a half off shore, and we pulled to shore, we would find it three or four miles. Q. Where used you to harbor at the island 3–A. I have been into about all the harbors there. We used to anchor a good deal to a lee. Q. Where 3—A. Off East Point. Q. There is a good lee off East Point %—A. Yes. Q. You never had any difficulty in running round the point when the Wind was from the northwest and getting a good lee ?—A. No. Q. And when the wind was from the other side you slipped round the point %—A. Yes. Q. There is no difficulty about doing that ?—A. No. Q. It is perfectly safe 3–A. No, it is not perfectly safe. 2728 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Why not ?—A. Because when the wind comes to the eastward you have to get away. You have no lee when the wind is from the eastward. Q. What harbors can you go into ?—A. Into no harbor with a South- east Wind. Q. You have not been there since the breakwater was built 3–A.. I have not been there since 1873. Q. Do you know that a large breakwater has been built since then 3– A. They were commencing to build a breakwater then, but only large enough for two or three whale-boats. * Q. You have not seen the breakwater which has been built there at an expense of $60,000 or $70,000?—A. No. Q. How can you say it was but sufficient to cover three or four whale- boats?—A. It was not built when I was there. Q. Did you ever fish much about Margaree ?—A. Yes. Q. Within three miles of the shore?—A. No. Q. Not off Margaree ?—A. I fished round Margaree, not within three miles of the shore. - Q. You did not try there ?–A. No ; we were offshore. Q. You are sure of that ?–A. Yes. Q. Although it is sixteen years ago?—A. Yes. Q. Although you had the right to fish where you pleased during many of the years of which you have spoken. Did no other vessels do it?— A. No. Q. How can you tell?—A. We could not find any when we were there. Q. You swear you never went in to try within three miles of the shore; is that the fact?—A. I don’t recollect of swearing I never went within three miles of shore to try. § Q. At Margaree?—A. I don’t remember it. - Q. Did you or did you not ?—A. I don’t remember anything about it. I don’t remember you asking me a question about Margaree Island. Q. Did you or did you not ever try to fish within three miles of the shore at or about Margaree?—A. I have. Q. Where and when 3–A. In different years. Almost every year I ever fished there we tried more or less. Q. And the fleet tried more or less?—A. Yes. Q. Do many of the fleet go there in the fall?—A. We went to Mar- garee, Port Hood, and Cape George; some part of the fall we would be up and down that coast. -- Q. Sometimes fishing within three miles of the shore and drifting off? —A. They cannot be always drifting off, because the wind is sometimes blowing on shore. &When the wind is favorable, is that mode of fishing pursued?— A. Yes. . Q. And they tried it every year?—A. Every year I have been there. Q. When the wind is favorable they try within the limits and drift off shore. That is the fact 7–A. They try more or less inshore and drift Off. | A's What the results of the vessels' voyages were, you don’t know?— . NO. Q. You kept on trying every year within the lines?—A. Occasionally We tried. Q. Is there not round Margaree Island itself very excellent fishing ground 3–A. I never found it so. Q. Have you heard other fishermen speak of it as such 3—A. I have heard of other vessels doing well there. It had been said there were AWARD OF THE FISIIERY COMMISSION. 2729 mackerel there, but when we got there we did not find any. I have heard from fishermen that they found fish there. Q. You never were in Bay Chaleurs ?—A. No. Q. You don’t know anything about the fishing there ?—A. No. Q. Did you try there in 1873%—A. We tried there. Q. What did you catch there?—A. Nothing. - Q. Did you ever try off Cape Breton shore?—A. I never tried along the north shore of Cape Breton. We tried at the Magdalen Islands and Prince Edward Island. I understand you now refer to 1873. Q. You went to Margaree ?—A. Yes. & \ Q. You tried once and did not catch any ?—A. Yes, and went away to Magdalen Islands. By Mr. Dana : Q. Your memorandum is made up for the bay voyages only 3–A. Yes. Q: When did you make it up; before you came here ?—A. I made a kind of memorandum at home and copied it when I came here. Q. Were you in the bay some time in 1855?—A. Yes. Q. And in 1856%—A. Yes. Q. And in 1858%—A. Yes. Q. State what years you were in the bay.—A. In 1854 in C. C. Davis; 1855, Racer; 1856; Belvidere; 1858, Sarah B. Harris; 1859, Trenton; 1860, Trenton; 1862, Roger Williams; 1873, Franklin S. Schank. - Q. Do you think that during these eight years you gave a fair trial to the inshore fisheries?—A. Yes. * Q. And you found them to be of little value; you tried them in va- rious ways—drifting off sometimes, and anchoring and drifting off at other times, according to the wind 3–A. Yes. Q. And you know of no other way of drifting?—A. Yes. No. 64. JOHN C. KNOWLTON, fisherman, of Rockport, Mass., was called on be- half of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster: Question. Rockport is a town adjoining Gloucester, and in the same maritime district 7–Answer. Yes. Q. How old are you ?—A.. I am 39. ſº - - lsº When did you first go fishing in the Gulf of St. Lawrence %–A. In 51. Q. How many voyages in all did you make to the bay ?—A. Nine. Q. In what year did you make your last voyage there ?—A. In 1874; 3 years ago. Q. Were you sharesman or skipper ?—A. I was sharesman. Q. Who was skipper ?—A. Donald McDonald. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you take"—A. I think we landed 430 barrels at Canso, where I left the vessel, which went back to the bay, while I returned home. - Q. What became of her afterward 2—A. She came home, I think, With about 575 or 600 barrels, including the 430 mentioned. Q. Was this not an unusually good catch for that year 7–A. No ; there were vessels which did a great deal better than that. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. When was this?—A. In 1874; 3 years ago. 2780 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. By Mr. Foster: Q. Where were the mackerel taken which you caught º–A. The first we caught were taken close inshore at the Miramichi Bar, or in other words, I might say, close to the mouth of Miramichi Harbor, where we Went to make a harbor. Q. That is outside of Miramichi Bay ?—A. Yes. Our fishermen call it a harbor, where we can get round under the lee of the wind, and we can get round that bar and make a good harbor with the wind in a cer- tain direction. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you get there?—A. Something like 30 or 40. I was then in the Grace L. Fears. We then Came across off North Cape, and I think that we got some 60 or 70 barrels more be- tween there and North Cape, broad off shore. - Q. At what distance from the shore ?—A. Well, I think 10 or 12 miles likely, or 15 miles. - Q. Where did you go from there?—A. We fished down off North Cape . and around there; we tried for one or two days, and then we went up around West Cape and came back again, We principally fished up and down the island. - º Q. Did you fish up and down Prince Edward Island on the north side 3–A. We did so on the east side. Q. What do you call the east side 3–A. The part between North Cape and East Point. Q. How far from the shore did you fish off the bend of the island 7– A. Well, with the exception of the time when we were coming out of CaScum peque, we fish outside of the three-mile limit. Q. How far from the shore ?—A. From 12 to 20 miles, I should say, Or Something in that neighborhood. - Q. Measured from where 2–A. The main land. - Q. From the extreme bend of the island 2–A. No ; but from the near- est land opposite where we were. - Q. You have told us the places were you fished that year within three miles of the shore ?—A. Yes; with the exception of the time when we were coming out of Cascumpeque Harbor. We then got about 50 wash barrels. I think we might have hove to somewhere about, I won’t say Within the three-mile limit, outside the bar, among the fishing boats, and drifted right off, so that, while doing so, we got about 60 wash barrels. Q. Which was the next previous year when you were in the gulf 3– A. 1872; I was then in the Waverley, Captain Tarr. Q. How many barrels did you catch 3–A. We brought home 230. ... Q. Where did you get them 2–A. We caught part of them off Prince Edward Island, between East Point and North Cape, up and down the island—well, from New London up off North Cape and broad off the island. Q. How far from the shore of the island did you usually fish 7–A. I never Was fishing within the limits with the exception of one voyage, and I caught very few mackerel there. Q. To What voyage do you refer ?—A. To the one I made in the Grace L. Fears in 1874. Q. Where else besides off the island did you fish in 1872 in the Wav- erley 3–A. Between East Point and the Magdalen Islands, and up on Banks Bradley and Orphan; I also fished up and down the island, 10, 15, or 20 miles up off North Cape. Q. What was the next previous year when you were in the bay ?—A. I will not be sure whether it was in 1868 or 1869. Q. Who was captain of the vessel ?—A. Mitchell. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2731 Q. You have brought no memoranda with you ?—A. No ; I could not make up any, as far as that goes, for that voyage. Q. All you have done is to put down what your recollection enables you to state 3—A. Yes. * - Q. You have no books or anything to guide you in this regard 2—A. NO. Q. What did you do while you were with Captain Mitchell?–A. We took 240 barrels of mackerel. - g . . Q. Where ?–A. On Banks Bradley and Orphan, and at the Magdalen Islands. - Q. T)id you get any of them anywhere else ?—A. No. -Q. In what schooner were you in your next previous year in the bay ? —A. The Laura H. Dodd. Q. During how many years were you in her ?—A. Two ; 1864 and 1865. Q. How many trips did you make during each of these years 2—A. TWO. *. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you take in your two trips in 1864?—A. About 700, I think. Q. Where 3—A. At the Magdalen Islands. Q, Were any of them caught inshore, except at the Magdalen Islands? —A. NO. Q. Whereabouts at the Magdalen Islands were they caught?—A. At Bird Rocks, principally. Q. Is that true of both trips ?–A. Well, during both, and more es- pecially during the first trip, we got a great many barrels at the Bird Bocks. Q. Did you fish inshore anywhere?—A. No. Q. The next year, 1865, you were in the Laura L. Dodd 3–A. Yes. Q. And you made two trips?—A. Yes. Q. How many barrels did you catch 3–A. About 600, I think, Q. Where?—A. On Banks Bradley and Orphan, and at the Magdalen Islands and off East Point; and a few were taken up and down the island. Q. How far from land did you fish off East Point?—A. It might have been, I should say, 15 or 20 miles. - Q. How far from the land was it 2–A. We were outside the limits, and from 10 to 20 miles off; no mackerel were to be got inshore at all. We tried inshore. Dy Mr. Thomson: Q. You have not fished since 1874%—A. No ; not in the bay; but I have on our shore. Q. When was your last trip made before 1874 %–A. In 1873. Q. And when was your next and previous trip made—in 1872 %–A. No. Q. Did you not state, in direct examination, that you fished in 1872. in the bay?—A. I believe I did not—yes; I was in the Waverley in 1872. Q. I thought you said that you came here without memoranda. ?—A. I did not come with any ; but I made a hasty sketch of my fishing ex- perience the other night when I was coming down here on the steamer. I have nothing here that amounts to anything. Q. Do you recollect, in those memoranda, that you were in the bay in 1872 %—A. Yes. Q. In what vessel ?—A. The Waverley. - Q. If I understood you rightly, in 1874, your last year in the bay, you Caught over one hundred barrels inshore ?—A. Yes. I would not say i 2732 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. over one hundred, but it was somewhere in the neighborhood of one hundred. We caught fifty wash barrels off Cascumpeque. Q. What do you mean by “wash barrels”?—A. A barrel of mackerel dressed just as we catch them, four or five buckets of water being poured on the fish. Q. Would that be equal to a barrel packed ?–A. No ; it takes about four wash barrels to make three packed barrels. . . w Q. When did you go into the gulf in 1874%—A. We left Gloucester after the 4th of July—I think about the 8th. - * : Q. And where did you go after you passed through the Gut 3–A. We went over to Souris, where we put ashore a couple of ladies, and then We worked along the island. • ‘. . . ; - Q. Did these girls belong to the island 7–A. Yes; we landed them in Yankee Cove. - * Q. Did you fish at Souris?—A. No. . * , Q. Why did you not try there ?—A. Because the mackerel there were not good for anything; they were small and poor. . . . . . Q. Were the boats fishing there ?–A. Some were, I think. • Q. Tid you try there?—A. O, yes; while the boat was ashore with the girls we hauled the main boom out and threw over a little bait, but the mackerel we caught were not fat enough to grease the eyebrow of a mosquito. - Q. But the boats were fishing there ?–A. Yes. *- Q. And still these mackerel were not fat enough to grease the eye- brow of a mosquito ?—A. Yes. We afterwards went north, and we got better fish there and near Miramichi. f - - - Q. How many mackerel did you catch at Souris?—A. About fifty or sixty. - Q. What did you do with them 2–A. I do not know ; but I guess that we ground them up for bait. ºn - J - Q. You would not put them in barrels at all ?–A. No ; we did not take any account of them at all. 4. - Q. Were those the kind which the boats were catching 2—A. I guess they were. - - - 3. Q. Are you sure of that ?—A. I am not quite sure; but I guess the fish were all alike around there. i , , Q. Did you look at the fish which the boats were catching 2—A. No ; we did not stop there, but we saw the boats catching fish. Q. On that occasion you lee-bowed the boats 2—A. O, no; Save our boat which put the ladies ashore. - Q. Did you not go in among the boats which were fishing off the shore ?—A. No ; we ran in there. Q. You ran in among the boats?—A. No ; but as we were going down from Yankee Cove, down by East Point, we saw the boats off fishing. Q. Did you see what sort of fish they were catching 2—A. Yes; we could see them fishing, and I judge that they were catching just the same fish as We caught. - - Q. You threw bait over to catch poor fish 2–A. We threw a little bait over and tried the fishing. Q. And then you drifted off shore ?—A. No ; as soon as the boat came back we got under weigh ; we threw bait over out of curiosity to find out what kind of fish they were and to see if they would bite. Q. And then you went on to North Cape 7–A. We went to the nor’- ard and worked up the island ; but we did not catch any fish. Q. Did you try while going up 2–A. Yes; once in awhile we threw Over a little bait. Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2733 Q. Was this within three miles of the shore ?—A. No. * Q. That was the only time that you caught any fish within three miles of the shore, until you reached Miramichi ?—A. Yes; then we fished off MiramichieBar. Q. That was close inshore ?–A. Yes. Q. And there you got about 40 barrels 2—A. Somewhere about 30– between 30 and 40 barrels. Q. It is as likely to have been 40 as 30%—A. Possibly the number might have been 40. Q. These were good fish 7–A. Well, they were better than the first Ones which they caught. Q. You kept them ?—A. Yes; we salted them. Q. They were fat enough to grease a mosquito ?–A. Well, yes; but not much more. The mackerel were very poor that year in the bay. Q. The whole time that you were there?—A. Yes. Q. After that where did you fish 7–A. Across over to North Cape, off French Village, and around off North Cape. Q. Close inshore ?—A. No ; we never fished within the limits there. Q: Why; were you afraid to do so?—A. No. Q. Why did you not fish nearer the shore ?—A. Well, we saw plenty of fish off shore. I do not know any other reason for not doing so. I Was not skipper of the vessel. - - - Q. What was the size of your vessel?—A. One hundred and ten or 120 tons. - - Q. What was her full fare 3—A. About 550 barrels. - Q. How many did you actually take out of the bay ?—A. We landed 430 barrels at Canso. - Q. To what number was the catch afterwards made up º–A. To some- where about 600 barrels, I believe; I would not speak definitely on this point, but I believe they brought home about 600 barrels. - Q. On her next trip º–A. This was the whole catch including what We landed at Canso. Q. What was your object in landing them there?—A. They wanted to get back to the bay again. - Q. You did not have a full cargo with 430 barrels 3–A. I wanted to get home myself, and if I had been skipper, I should have taken the Vessel home. Q. You did not have a full cargo then 7–A. Well, we had a very good fare for the time; if they had taken care, we would have had more— probably 100 barrels more. Q. Why did the vessel not go straight home 2—A. I do not know ; I Was not skipper. Q. You do not know why these fish were landed at Canso 2–A. I sup- pose that the captain thought, as I said before, that he would go back to the bay. Q. Were you one of the sharesmen 3—A. Yes. Q. You had then something to say about it 3–A. No, not at all ; the Captain generally does what he pleases in this respect. ſº ſº Does he never consult with the men 3–A. He does not do so very Often. - Q. On this occasion did he consult with the men?—A. No. Q. Are you serious in saying that you do not know why you landed those fish at Canso ?—A. No, I do not know. I wanted to go home, as far as I was concerned, and I did so. Q. And he wanted to get back to the bay at once 2—A. Yes, I Sup- p0Se SO. 2734 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Was not that the reason 7–A. Yes. 8 Q. Why did you not say so before ?—A. I say I do not know the reason; there might have been other reasons. You might ask the rea- son why I went home, and I would say, I suppose, it was" because I wanted to. Q. But that is your own business %–A. Yes. - Q. Do you not know that the captain knew he could make two trips by transshipping his cargo at Canso 3–A. Well, under Some circumstances he could do so. - Q. And he could under those circumstances 3–A. Yes. Q. When the vessel came back in the fall with her second fare, did she take the barrels which had been landed at Canso on board 3–A. Yes. - Q. She just landed and left them there ?—A. Yes; until she returned. Q. I suppose that this was of considerable service to you ?—A. Well, I do not know of any service that it was, unless it aided the captain's desire to get back to the bay. * * Q. Does this not enable...you to make two or three trips when other- wise you could only make one trip 7–A. Well, sometimes it does. Q. How long would it take you as an ordinary rule to run from Canso to Gloucester 7—A. Well, I have gone home from there and come back again in eleven days. Q. Is that the ordinary time consumed in this passage?—A. No ; that is about two weeks. -- - Q. Are not these two weeks very important during the fishing Sea- son º–A. Well, that all depends on circumstanges. Q. If the circumstances are such that there is good fishing in the bay, is it not important to be there as soon as possible?—A. No ; during the last ten years, if I had been in the bay and got a trip of mackerel, I Would have taken it home. & * Q. Suppose there is good fishing in the bay, is it not very important to get back there and save these two weeks 7–A. No ; the wear and tear caused by leaving the fish round, and the leakage, causes a large percentage of them to be lost ; and thus it is a disadvantage to land. and leave them there. I would never consent to the landing of a cargo of mine at Canso. - Q. Do I understand you to say that a large percentage of the pickle runs off there?—A. No ; but it is bad for the fish to be left there, in SODO € CàSeS. * Q. Was this the case with these particular fish in that particular cargo 7–A. I think it was with some of them. Q. Will you swear that it was?—A. I will not swear that—no. Q. Why do you mention suposititious cases, unless this has really taken place? What did you get for your mackerel that year?—A. About $6.50 for number ones, I think. Q. Was that the ordinary price that year 2—A. Yes; for bay mack- erel. - Q. You got the highest price that ruled for the season 7–A. No. Q. Then the fish were not injured in any way ?—A. I do not know that they were. * * Q. You stated that 600 barrels was not an extraordinary catch that year, and that others did better?—A. Yes. Q. There was good fishing in the bay that season?—A. Yes; espe- cially around the island. g * Q. You mean inshore ?—A. I mean around the island, inshore and off shore. - - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2735 Q. Did you fish at all at Margaree that year 2—A. No. Q. Did you fish off Cascumpeque and Rustico, on the northern shore of the island 7–A. Yes. Q. Did you fish there after you got back from Miramichi?—A. Yes; off Cascumpegue we did. - Q. Inshore?—A. When we were coming out of the harbor—we ran in there to make a harbor—we fished coming down. Q. Did you get good fish 7–A. We got better fish than we found down off Souris. Q. How many barrels did you catch there.?—A. Somewhere about 50 or 60 wash barrels; I could not give the exact quantity. - Q. But they were good fish 7–A. They were as good as any in the bay. Q. You have no respect as a rule for bay mackerel ?—A. Oh, yes. Q. Are there good mackerel in the bay ?—A. Yes; some years they are first rate and some years they are poor. - Q. I suppose this is the case everywhere ?—A. Yes. - Q. As a rule there is good fishing in the bay ?—A. It is not as good as it is on our shore, as a rule. Q. Do you catch mackerel within the three-mile limit on your shore?— A. Yes. - Q. Will you swear to that ?—A. Yes; I so caught some myself this SeaSOIl. Q. Is it a usual thing to catch them there within the three-mile limit, Ór has this been the case during the last eight or ten years 7–A. I do not think that it is. . Q. Then you do not wish the Commission to understand that your shore fishery is carried on within the three-mile limit?—A. No, not on the Whole. - Q. Your shore fishery is prosecuted from 10 to 15 and 50 miles from the coast 3–A. Yes; and 150 miles from it, off on George's Bank. Q. That is what you call your shore fishery 3—A. Yes. Q. In point of fact no mackerel are caught as a rule within 3 miles of your shore ?—A. Oh, yes. Q. Is there good mackerel-fishing there within the three-mile limit 2– A. Yes. - Q. And this always has been so º–A. Yes; there is some nice fishing there. ; - Q. And the American witnesses who have testified here that there is no fishing to speak of there within the three-mile limit are entirely mis- taken 3–A. Yes; I testify to my own experience. Q. When were you fishing within 3 miles of your shore in a vessel ?— A. Last summer, and for two days this summer. - Q. Where did you so fish last summer ?—A. All up and down the coast of Maine, and right in within 3 or 4 miles of Monhiggin. - Q. I am speaking of the three-mile limit.—A. It might have been 3 or 4 miles off shore. Q. Do you not know that this is a very vague statement 7 Will you Swear that you fished last year along your coast and caught mackerel within 3 miles of your shore?—A. Yes. - Q. To any extent 7–A. No, I won’t say that. Q. What proportion of your catch last year was taken within 3 miles of your shore ?—A. Well, a very small proportion. I was only so fish- ing a very short time. * Q. The great bulk of the catch off the American shore is taken from 10 to 50 miles out 2—A. I do not know about that. 2736 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. You do not know whether this is the case or not ?—A.. I do not know about that matter. Q. What other time did you so fish along the American coast?—A.. I so fish, more or less, most every season, for a short time, either in the bay or on Our shore. Q. Did you do so this year 2—A. Yes, for a little while ; about a fort- night. - Q. In what vessel?—A. In a dory and in a vessel of about forty tons. Q. You did so in different vessels?—A. Yes; we went out on an ex- Cursion like. sº Q. You were just out for a pleasure trip.?—A. Yes. Q. Do you not know that this is a rather serious matter 7—A. I had just got home, and being obliged to wait a while on a certain business, I thought I would go out and catch a few fish, Q. Just for recreation ?—A. Yes. - Q. How far did you go out 3–A. Well, not three gun-shots from the rockS. Q. Where 2—A, Off Cape Ann. Q. What did you catch 3—A. Mackerel. Q. How many 3–A. One day I struck a barrel myself and I suppose the six of us got eight or nine barrels. Q. What did you fish with ?—A. Lines and hooks. Q. That was this year 7–A. Yes. Q. Do you wish the Commission to understand that the mackerel fish- ery was first rate this year, off the American shore, within 3 miles of the coast?—A. It was better inshore than off shore. It has been a very poor year; our mackerel-fishing has been very unsuccessful and the fishing there has been better inshore than off shore. Q. Your fishermen have tried inshore this year 2–A. Yes. Q. And still they have been very unsuccessful ?—A. Yes, and they have tried off shore. - Q. And there the fishing was worst 2—A. Yes. Q. That only shows that the mackerel have deserted your coast, both inshore and off shore ?—A. It appears there are plenty of fish, but they are so small that the fishermen do not want to catch them. Q. Do they catch them 2–A. They catch some, a certain percentage Of them. º Q. With what ?—A. Lines and Seines. Q. As far as good fishing is concerned, there has been no fishing along your coast at all to speak of this year 2—A. No ; but very good fish have been caught on our shore this year. & Q. Then the American market has to be supplied with mackerel from the bay this year 7–A. I do not know about that, but I think that a small percentage, likely 25 per cent, of the mackerel in the American Imarket will come out of the bay; I do not know that I would like to swear it would be that. Q. 25 per cent. Will have to come in there from the bay ?—A. Yes. Q. Then if the fishing has been very bad on your shore, where will the rest come from ?—A. From our shore. Q. And you say that there is no fishing at all on your shore this year? —A. Yes—where I Say there is no fishing at all. f Q. And 75 per cent. Will come in from your shore ?—A. Yes. Q. How many barrels of mackerel do you think have been taken on the American coast this year 7—A. I could not tell you. I could not, estimate the quantity. * Q. Do you know how many have come in from the bay ?—A, No. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2737 Q. Will you tell me how you estimate this—that about 25 per cent. of your supply will come from the bay and 75 per cent. from your shore, if you do not know the number caught 7–A. I do not know definitely ; I do not say that 25 per cent. would come from the bay but it would be about that—25 or 30 per cent. Q. How is it possible to give a percentage if you do not know the number of barrels caught 3–A. I have not made an estimate of the number; I make up this estimate from what I have seen of vessels coming in from the bay and from the boat fishing. Q. Do you mean to say that you have come here to make this state- ment based on no certain knowledge of any kind, and that under these circumstances you swear to the percentage that will come from the bay, when you do not know the number of barrels of mackerel which have been caught in the bay ?—A. No ; I do not confine myself to any per- centage ; but I give the best estimate I am able to form in this relation. Q. Is it to make a statement concerning matters about which you do not know anything that you presume to come here and give the per- centage that will come into the American market from the bay, and the percentage that will come from your own shore, without knowing what the catches have been in the bay, and on the American coast? Can any man in his senses make a percentage without any basis for it 2–A.. I got it by inquiring from parties who had been there. Q. Tell me how many barrels did you learn from inquiry had been taken on the American coast 3–A. I cannot tell you. - Q. How many, did you learn from your inquiries, were taken in the bay?—A. Well, a large portion of the mackerel which has been caught this year in the bay has been taken by your boats, and they come into our market. When I speak about mackerel coming into our market from the bay, I mean that your folks ship them. Q. I want to find out how many barrels these people told you came from the bay, so as to enable you to form an Opinion as to the percent- age?—A. Well, I would not confine myself to any rule about that mat- ter. Q. In point of fact, after swearing that 75 per cent. of the mackerel will come from your shore, and 25 per cent. from the bay— A. I beg your pardon. Q. I take it that in giving me an answer to any sort of a question, you are swearing to such answer %—A. I did not speak so precisely. Q. You understand that you are answering questions under oath?— A. Yes. Q. Will you tell me what earthly basis you have for saying that only 25 per cent. of your supply of mackerel would come from the bay, and 75 per cent. from your own coast 3—A. I say So from, information that I have gathered from parties who have been there. Q. What information is that ?—A. It is that there has been a large catch of mackerel taken by the boats, up and down and around the island; it has been a very large catch, an exceedingly large catch, and an unusually large catch. I do not know whether this is so or not ; I have not seen the catch, but it is on that report that I base my estimate. Q. And because there has been an unusually large catch in the bay, you say that 25 per cent. of your supply would come thence %–A.. I mean the catch by the boats—the small boats—and not by Our fisher- Iſle]]. - Q. And this mackerel goes to the American market 2—A. Yes. Q. You have heard this, and do you give that as a reason why Only 172 F. 2738 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 25 per cent. of your supply should come from the bay, and 75 per cent. from your own coast”—A, Yes. - 3. * Q. I could understand it if you reversed the percentages 7–A. If you saw 500 sail of seiners off Cape Ann, you would begin to think that though they all got only 100 barrels apiece, still a great many fish would be taken. Q. Did all these vessels get 100 barrels apiece 3–A. I do not think that they did ; I say, if they did. Q. Will you swear that 15,000 barrels of mackerel have been caught on your coast this year 2–A. Yes, I swear so ; I have not seen the figures to make up statistics on, but I make them up on my own judg- ment ; yes, sir. - Q. Did you see the fish being taken 3–A. No ; only partially. I saw Some taken. - Q. You are speaking at random altogether ?—A. I have no statistics. Q. Because you saw the seiners, you say that they must take so much without any inquiry as to the facts º–A. I have seen them taking fish, more or less. - Q. Do you swear that 15,000 barrels have been taken on your shore this year?—A. No ; I would not swear that 15,000 barrels have been taken. Q. You will not swear what quantity has been taken 2–A. No ; but to the best of my opinion 15,000 barrels have been taken. Q. Do you know what quantity has been taken this year on your shore ?—A. No. - Q. Do you know what quantity has been taken this year in the bay ?—A. No. - Q. And all you know about the bay mackerel fishery is that an un- usually large catch has been made there this year 2—A. Yes; by the boats. Q. And you admit that on your own coast this has been a very bad season 3–A. Yes. - Q. And, therefore, because you have heard that in the bay there has been an unusually large catch, and because on your own coast there has been an unusually small catch, you think that your own coast will send in 75 per cent, of the mackerel to your market, as against 25 per cent. from the bay ?—A. I think so ; that is my opinion. Q. In what vessel were you in 1868?–A. The Veteran, I think. Q. Who was her captain 7–A. Mitchell. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you catch 7–A. Two hundred and thirty. - - Q. What was her tonnage %–A. About 70, I think. Q. What was her full cargo 2–A. Three hundred or three hundred and twenty-five barrels. * Q. Then you got pretty nearly a full fare ?—A. We obtained a little Over two-thirds of it. - Q. Where did you fish 7–A. Around the Magdalen Islands and on Banks Bradley and Orphan. Q. You did not attempt to go inshore?—A. No. Q. And, although you had not a full cargo, you fished about the places you have named, and did not go inshore to complete your cargo, although you had a license?—A. Yes. e * Q. Why did you take out a license ?—A. We did not know where the mackerel were when we got through the Gut of Canso, and so we thought we would take out a license. . Q. Do I understand you to say that on coming into the bay you did AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2739 not know whether the fish would be inshore or off shore ?—A. No ; I never saw the mackerel inshore until I made my last voyage there. Q. Is it a fact, that you do not know when you enter the bay whether the fish are inshore or not ?—A. No. - Q. You made your last voyage in the bay in 1874?—A. Yes. Q. And that was the only time when you ever saw the fish inshore?— A. Yes. Q. If that was the case, what induced you in 1868, six years previously, to take out a license, when you did not want to go inshore at all?—A. There had been some trouble, and a license had been demanded once, I think. Q. When you had only fished off shore?—A. We did not know about the mackerel being inshore. - e Q. Is it not necessarily a privilege to be able to follow the mackerel when they run inshore in the bay and wherever they may go 3–A. Yes. Q. If successful, is it not a privilege to be able to follow the schools wherever they may go 7–A. Yes. Q. In that view of the matter, the right to fish inshore in the bay is very important to the American people?—A. Yes. Q. Could they, in your opinion, successfully prosecute the fisheries in the bay without the right of going inshore to fish 7–A. As far as my experience goes, I think that this is not necessary. We always got the principal part of our fish off shore; and I think the off-shore fisheries alone could be prosecuted successfully. Q. Did you not tell me just now that it was a great privilege for the Americans to be able to follow the schools inshore ?—A. Yes; that is a benefit to a certain degree, I think. Q. Did you not tell me that this was a great privilege º–A. Well, it is a privilege. Q. And a valuable privilege 7–A. Well, it is a privilege worthy of a certain amount of consideration. Q. Is it or is it not a valuable privilege 7–A. It is valuable to a cer- tain extent. Q. To what extent is this the case ?–A. Well, I could not Say. By Mr. Foster : Q. Have you Seined in United States vessels off our coast 2—A. Yes. Q. When 3–A. Last year. Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you get 2—A. About 250, taken in six weeks; we got about 100 in one haul. - Q. You did not have very good luck º–A. The vessel had not done anything previously. - Q. Did you ever seine during any other year 7—A. Yes; I did so the year before, but I only seined a short time; about four weeks. Q. You speak of seeing a large number of Seiners together; but where have you seen as many as 500 vessels fishing at once with Seines or hooks off the American coast 3–A. I saw them in Gloucester Harbor; they had gone in there for a harbor. Q. Where do these vessels usually fish 7–A. I never saw that num- ber fishing together ; they fish all scattered around the coast. 2740 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 65. WEDNESDAY, October 17, 1877. The Conference met. JAMEs H. MYRICK, fish-dealer, of Boston, was called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster: Question. Where were you born ?—Answer. At the town of New- castle, State of Maine. - Q. And your home is in the Dorchester district, Boston ?—A. Yes. Q. Where do you carry on your fishing business?—A. Chiefly at Tig- nish, Prince Edward Island; that is the part of the business which I look after and represent. f Q. Who is your partner º–A. Isaac C. Hall. Q. Your firm's name is Hall & Myrick?—A. Yes. | Q. During how many years have you constantly resided, for a portion of the year, on Prince Edward Island 3–A. About 17. Q. During how much of the year do you stay there ?—A. Usually from three to six months. Q. At what part of the island 3—A. Tignish. -- * Q. Where is Tignish situated 3–A. About eight miles from North Cape, Prince Edward Island. Q. Describe the business which you carry on there.—A. Well, we have a large retail store there, and we supply fishermen and boats, and occasionally vessels; we buy and cure fish, and ship fish. We buy pro- duce and we ship produce, but the fish business is the principal busi- ness which we carry on. Q. How many fishing stages are there under your personal super- vision, and where are they situated ?–A. Well, I have had four this season ; two of them are situated on the east side of North Cape, and two on the west side of it. We are near North Cape, and it is but five or six miles across. Q. How many boats do you employ?—A. We have the product chiefly of about 150 boats; we employ directly 50 boats, and, in addition, we supply parties who own, perhaps, 100 boats, and obtain the product of these boats. - Q. How many men are employed in these boats?—A. They average about three each ; perhaps at some seasons of the year the number will be a little larger. Q. Over what extent of shore are these 150 boats located ?–A. About 30 miles. Q. During the fishing season how often do you go over these 30 miles?—A. I might say, I do so almost daily, so that I can see that distance along shore, that is during the busy season. I keep a house at Tignish during the Summer. Q. And is your house there so situated as to command a view of the water ?—A. Yes. - Q. How is your store there situated ?–A. It is directly near the water's edge, a stone's throw from the water. t Q. How many barrels of mackerel have been sent this year from your part of the island and your stations?—A. What I have shipped and what I will ship, but has not yet gone forward, will amount to about 4,600 or 4,700 barrels, for my part. Q. That does not include what Mr. Hall, of Charlottetown, will send AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 274.1 to market?—A. No ; this is just for these 4 stations, and what I gather in from surrounding boats. Q. How many barrels in all did you send from your own stations last year?—A. A little over 2,000. Q. The catch is better this year than it was last 3–A. Yes; very much better. Q. Have you any vessels fishing?—A. Not from that point, anything to Speak of; we have, however, some very small vessels, which are little larger than boats. Q. Describe the size and character of those boats of yours.-A. They Vary very much ; a small proportion of them are what I call large boats, Which will go off for three or four days, or for perhaps a week; and on which the men can cook and sleep. They are open boats, but still large enough to accommodate three or four men, for cooking and sleeping on board, and Salting fish. A small portion of them are of that character, and the size of the others varies from that down to small boats of 15 and 16 feet keel. Some of the boats go out and in perhaps two or three times a day; and others will go out and remain out a week. - Q. Describe the way in which these boats of yours fish in the different parts of the season; how far from the shore do they usually go to catch mackerel ? Tell all you know about that, from what falls within your personal Observation.—A. It is customary for these boats to start early in the morning, and perhaps they will go off shore for a mile or 1% miles, and come to try for mackerel, and throw out bait; and if they do find mackerel there, why they stay there; but if they find few mackerel, or none there, they go out farther. Some will scatter off, while one or two may fish within one or 14 miles of the shore, another boat will go half a mile farther out, and another half a mile farther still—they scatter in that Way. There is no uniform rule for taking up their places; but this is generally the way they do. Sometimes, when they find a school, all the boats will gather in together; but if they merely pick up mackerel, they may be half a mile, a mile, or two miles from the shore—stretched Out along the shore. Q. How far is the farthest distance from the shore to which these boats usually go?—A. They will go out perhaps for 7—7 or eight miles; 7 miles, I should say, would be about the greatest distance, speaking for the point where I am located. This varies in different parts of the island. At Some points on it they find the fish plentiful quite near the shore, and then, perhaps, 15 or 20 miles along the shore from that point, you Will have to go farther out to find them. I suppose that this depends Somewhat on the character of the bottom and of the eurves and tides; that is the way they fish. In the warmest weather, in midsummer, the fish are nearer inshore in my experience, and towards the fall the fish- ermen have to go farther out for them. When the weather gets pretty rough in the fall the small boats do not go out, but the larger boats go Off longer distances. * Q. How far out did the boats go during the past month?—A. During the past month I have not been aware of any fish having been caught on the east side of North Cape, except 4 or 5 miles out; but on the other side of North Cape, the west side, they were taken nearer inshore; this is almost always the case in the fall—on the one side the fish are then taken at a longer distance off shore, while on the other side they are quite handy. This depends on the wind; a west wind drives the fish On Shore on the one side and off shore on the other. They go with the wind, I think. * Q. Do these boats usually fish drifting or at anchor 7—A. They almost 2742 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. always fish at anchor, and very rarely drifting, unless it is at a very moderate rate. Q. Do these boats catch their mackerel from the bottom or the top of the Water 7—A. They may sometimes have to take longer lines and fish from the bottom; and then again the fish may come for a little while up to the surface. I think that this season—during the latter part of it particularly—the men have fished nearer the surface; the fish have Come up, but they have been very delicate about biting ; it was hard to make them, bite any way; they came up around the hooks and ate up the bait that was thrown to them; but they did not like the look of the hooks, and they avoided them. Q. What bait do you furnish your boats with ?—A. Herring mostly, and Sometimes pogies and menhaden. Q. Which is the better bait 2–A. Pogies. Q: Why do you not use them altogether?—A. They come more ex- pensive; we have to get them wholly from the States, and they are too expensive for boat-fishing ; and then this is lighter bait, it floats on the Surface. It is fatter, and it keeps the fish from going down. Q. You have seen, I suppose, the United States fishing schooners fish- ing off your part of the coast 7—A O, yes. - Q. At What distance from the shore do they fish 7–A. Of course this Varies at different seasons; but as a general thing the mackerel that are caught inshore are smaller than those which are taken outside. Now, this season, I have known vessels come in, but not a great many, and fish near the shore, within two or three miles off, fish awhile, and get a few mackerel, and on finding what their quality was, go off somewhere else; Sometimes, however, they get better mackerel inside. Q. Do the United States schooners usually fish as near the shore as the boats 3—A. No ; this is not the case at the point where I am located —decidedly not. & Q. How is it that the boats can fish successfully where the vessels cannot do so?—A. Well, a boat will go out and anchor down; throw Over bait and take it very leisurely, sticking perhaps in the same spot all day, or for a good many hours, and pick up a few mackerel, while a Vessel Will come along, and finding the same kind of fishing, will not think it worth while to stay there, but go off; then, again, I have in- formation as to a great many instances of vessels coming and finding boats picking up mackerel pretty freely, and throwing bait, and stay- ing for half an hour or an hour and not catching any mackerel, go off; that has been my experience for a good many years. I have been out With the boats for half a day's fishing and seen it. Q. Do the vessels ever fish from the bottom as the boats do 2–A. Not often, but they will do so sometimes. When they cannot find fish any- Where else, they may come among the boats, put their anchors down, and spring up, as they call it, and catch a few mackerel; but they do not make a practice of it, as a general thing. They may do this Some- times. wº- Q. Taking the past few years, say the past four or five years, to what extent have United States vessels fished under your observation within 3 miles of the shore ?—A. Well, during the past four or five years, and during the past three years particularly, the fleet of American vessels around the island has been quite small; this has been more particularly the case since the great storm. They have rather avoided fishing near that part of the island since then. Q. What do you mean by the great storm 2–A. I refer to the storm AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2743 we had in 1873—the August gale, which wrecked so many American Schooners about the island. Q. As you have been on the island every year for something like sev- enteen years, you must have heard discussions as to the three-mile limit, and SO on 3—A. Yes; I have heard a good deal said about it. Q. Has your attention been drawn to estimate the distance from the shore at which the three mile limit lies 3–A. Yes; I think that my judg- ment is pretty good on that subject. . - {Q. During how many months are your vessels employed in fishing?— A. Well, cod and mackerel are caught for about 4 months in the year, On an average. * > Q. And how long are mackerel caught 2—A. For about 3% months. Q. What is a good catch of mackerel for one of your boats during the Season 3–A. I consider 75 barrels a fair average; indeed, this is a very good catch for the average. Q. For three men 2–A. Yes. Q. And what would you regard as a good catch for a single day ?—A. Well, I shall say two barrels, from 2 to 2% barrels; and this is better than the average. Q. Where do all your fish go 2–A. To Boston and New York, but to Boston more particularly. * Q. What is the largest number of barrels of mackerel which ever went from your port to Boston during one year’?—A. Something uinder 7,000, perhaps 6,800. - Q. Was that from you personally or from your firm 7–A. That was from me personally; that was the catch for one year; but I do not think that it all went down the same season. Q. But it all went down earlier or later ?—A. Yes. Q. Has the boat-fishing been increasing since you began to go to the island 3–A. Yes; it has increased very materially. - Q. And how has this been for the last few years, say since July, 1873% —A. It has been increasing a good deal since then. Q. What kind of a year was last year for mackerel?—A. The catch Was very smali and light. ~. $ Q. For boats and vessels 3–A. Yes; for both. Q. Did any vessels that came to fish in the gulf last year make any money at all?—A. I made inquiries in the States, and the result of What I could gather was that there was not a vessel which visited the bay last year that made any money. Q. Do you know how the vessel-fishing has been in the bay during the present season 3–A. Well, I do somewhat ; as I stated before, a few vessels have been around the part of the island where I am located. I have seen some vessels there, but the number has been Small. Q. As far as you know, what has been the result of the vessel-fishing in the bay this season 2–A. Well, I should think it has been light— Quite a small catch. Q. How has it been with the boats?—A. They have made a very fair catch this season; this has been above the average considerably, I Should think. Q. During the Reciprocity Treaty, that is, prior to 1866, were many provincial vessels fishing for mackerel?—A. Well, about Prince Edward Island, there was then quite a fleet of vessels. - e Q. After the Reciprocity Treaty was abrogated, what became of them 3–A. Well, they gradually abandoned that business, so that at the present time they have very few vessels of any considerable size fitted 2744 AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. out for mackerel-fishing in the gulf; that is, from Prince Edward Island. I do not know how it is in this respect with Nova Scotia. º Q. And there are none now there?—A. The number of vessels of any considerable size there is now very few. -- Q. Do you know of any there 4–A. Yes. - Q. Name them.—A. There is one, the Lettie, which my partner fits out at Charlottetown ; she has always been engaged in that business. She goes fishing for two or three months in the year. I do not know of any other, though I have understood that some others have been fitted out after this purpose. - Q. What view did you and your partner take with regard to securing the fishery clauses in the Treaty of Washington 2–A. Well, we were very anxious to have free fish. My partner took a more active part in this relation ; he had more opportunity than I had for doing so. Q. He went to Washington 3–A. Yes. Q. You did not ?—A. No. Q. What was the effect on your business of the termination of the Reciprocity Treaty, and the imposition of a duty on Canadian mackerel entering the American market 2—A. Well, I cannot answer that ques- tion further than by saying that they had a very disastrous effect on Our business. - Q. Did you begin to feel the full effect of it at once, or did this take some time?—A. No; during two or three years afterward we got a very good quality of mackerel, for which we obtained pretty good prices, so that we could afford to pay the duty. Q. Were these currency prices 3–A. Yes. Prices then ruled pretty high ; that was a time when the price of everything was somewhat inflated. Q. I suppose that you may say either that prices ruled high or that currency then ruled low?—A. Yes; you can look at it either way. But when we reached the year 1871, I think a good large catch was then taken on the American shore, and a catch of poorer mackerel on the island shore, and then matters turned the other way with us. Prices were very low, and we suffered accordingly. Q. What became of your business, in view of that large catch on the United States coast 2—A. Prices went down very low, and we lost money Very fast. Prices collapsed that year completely. Q. What would be the effect upon the business of your firm of putting back the former duty of $2 a barrel upon mackerel sent from Prince Edward Island to the States ? I would like you to explain your views in this regard particularly.—A. Well, I suppose, since we have got our business established there, and our buildings and facilities for carrying on the fishery, it would be difficult for us to abandon it altogether, but We would then turn our attention more particularly to cod-fishing, until at any rate the mackerel season got well advanced and the mackerel became fat, and if any would bring a high price it would be those taken in the latter part of the season. We might catch some of them, but We would not undertake to catch poor mackerel to compete with those Caught on the American shore. Q. Explain why not.—A. Well, No. 3 mackerel, which are poor mack- erel, generally bring a good deal less price than fat mackerel, and men do not catch any more poor mackerel than they do fat ones; the cost of Catching them and of barreling and shipping them is the same, while the fat mackerel bring a better price. We could carry on the cod-fishing business irrespective of the American market; we could catch, cure, and ship codfish to other markets—to the West India markets, and we might AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2745 make a fair business at that; but as to catching mackerel exclusively under such circumstances, it would not do to depend on it at all. Q. How does Prince Edward Island mackerel compare in point of size and quality with those which are caught at the Magdalen Islands?—A. Well, in the reports I have heard of vessels fishing at the Magdalen Islands and at the point where the mackerel are sold, they speak of the Magdalen Island mackerel as being much better and larger; that is, for the greater number of years. Q. Of late years, where have the best No. 1 mackerel been taken chiefly 7–A. These are taken on the American shore; they suit the better class of customers and bring the highest price. Q. Is there an inspector of mackerel on the island 7–A. Yes. Q. Are you a deputy inspector”—A. Yes; my name is on the barrels as deputy inspector and I pay my fees to the inspector-general. Q. Who is he?—A. His name is Frank Arsenault; he lives in Prince County. - Q. What do you pay him 2–A. I think it is somewhere about 2 cents a barrel; it is not a very heavy fee. Q. Mr. Davies says that you are mistaken about that?—A. My books show that we have paid it every year, whether it is a mistake or not. I Obtained permission some years ago to act as deputy inspector, and I have paid my fees. - - Q. Every year since?—A. Yes, every year since, I think. I think my books will show that I have paid the fees every year, for five or six years. Q. You have paid two cents a barrel ?—A. Yes, somewhere about that ; between two and three cents. Q. IS there any sort of doubt about your brand as inspector of mack- erel ?—A. No. Q. Describe exactly what you put on the barrels.-A. The brand is circular; the first words are, “Prince Edward Island,” and the next, I think, are, “Two Hundred Pounds—J. H. Myrick, Deputy Inspector.” I think this covers the whole brand. Q. Then you are deputy inspector de facto, whether there is law for it or not ?—A. I do not know what the law is about it; but I know that I have paid my fees to the inspector-general. We have had a running account with this man, and we have given him credit every year, on the Settlement, for his fees. I do not know that we are compelled to pay Such fees; but I know that these have been paid ; that he has had Credit for them in his account every year, I think. He calls for the re- turns and we give them to him. Q. Do you make returns of your mackerel ?—A. Yes; to the general inspector, when he calls, and he generally calls in the winter time. Q. To this same gentleman 7–A. Yes. Q. The fish go in that way to Boston 7–A. Yes. Q. Now, in point of fact, are a good many of your mackerel reinspect- ed and culled after they are sold in Boston 7–A. Well, I do not know about that, but this may be the case; that is a pretty difficult question to answer. I hardly know whether this is the case or not, because I am not there except in winter, and I do not know whether they go through another inspection or not. This is not necessary, but it may be done. A dealer may buy 100 barrels of mackerel and then put them in half barrels, and in that way have them inspected, but I do not think that he culls them. - Q. Some evidence has been given here as to imported mackerel being thus gone over, culled, and reinspected, so as to make them more sal- 2746 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. able and the average better than they are, when they come in, in the foreign importation ?—A. I do not think that this makes the mackerel more Salable, but perhaps some dealer there may consider such barrels of mackerel, when number twos, good enough for number ones, and pack them in half barrels and then have them branded number ones. Q. In Boston 3–A. Yes. This may be done; I have no doubt that it is done. f - Q. For the very best mackerel, what they call mess mackerel, the fat- test and the best, how extensive is the market in the United States at high prices 2 Eſow many barrels of mackerel, costing $20 a barrel, and from that upward, would the United States market take 3–A. It might take, I think, 6,000 or 8,000. Q. No more ?—A. At $20 a barrel I should hardly think that more Would be taken. Q. What becomes of it 3–A. Eight or ten years ago more might have been taken, because a dollar more a barrel was not then looked upon in the same light as at the present moment; but now that is not the case. Q. Where do these high costing mackerel go?—A. To the cities chiefly, and hotels; some private families possibly take a few, but I do not think that a very large proportion of them are used in New England. I think that a good many go to Pennsylvania, to Philadelphia; and to New York City particularly. Q. At high prices will the market take a large quantity of the com- mon grades of mackerel, which are used not in the way of luxury, but for food 7–A. This would depend somewhat on the catch of lake fish and herring; a good many are used South ; and these come into com- petition, I suppose, with the herring fisheries. I should suppose that at the rate of $7 or $8 a barrel, the market would take a pretty good catch of mackerel, grades number twos and threes. Q. At what point will the purchase on a large scale of common mack- erel cease for consumption ?—A.. I should think that if the common grades of mackerel went in price above $10 a barrel, it would go pretty hard if any considerable quantity of them was taken. Q. When you go to Boston in winter are you in the habit of going about and making inquiries touching matters connected with your busi- ness %–A. Yes, almost daily. Q. You do not then have a great deal of business to do 2–A. No. Q. What is it that fixes the price of mackerel in the United States market?—A. O, well, of course it is the supply and demand, as is the case with everything else. When there is a large catch of mackerel on the American shore, prices rule low ; this is a very sensitive market. If a fleet of 500, 600, or 800 vessels are fishing for mackerel, and those interested get reports of the fleet doing anything, the market falls at once; and this is the case particularly when prices are any way inflated. Q. Has there been anything to interfere, during the last few years, With the demand for salt mackerel? Has this been as great of late years as it was formerly 7–A. The universal opinion among dealers in New York and Boston and other places is that the demand for salt mackerel has fallen off a great deal. Of course, the number of inhabitants is in- creasing very rapidly, but the demand for mackerel has not increased in that same ratio, and there must be some cause for it. Probably the catch of lake fish has interfered somewhat with this demand, and Ship- ments of fresh fish by rail has been extending farther into the Country Of late, besides. Q. How far west are fresh fish sent 3–A. They are dispatched as far West as any one travels, I think, from what I have understood. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2747 Q. In what season of the year is the mackerel market most active 3– A. Well, my observation has been that during September and October and perhaps a part of August this is the case. 4 Q. How has it usually been of late years in winter ?—A. Of late years it has been very quiet, much more so, than was the case formerly. Q. You have had a long acquaintance with the fishing of vessels and boats; have you known trouble to occur frequently between them or not º–A. Well, I have heard occasionally of vessels coming pretty near the boats, but the former very rarely ran foul of the latter; it has been Several years since I have heard of any collisions of that kind, and any considerable complaint being made in this regard. Q. How many complaints of that sort do you suppose you have heard during the 18 years you have been on Prince Edward Island?—A. Many Opinions prevail on this point among the boat fishermen; some will say, When they see an American fleet coming, that this is going to hurt their fishing, while others say that it may help them, owing to the throwing Over of a large quantity of bait, which may attract the fish to the spot ; Others again say that the throwing over of a large quantity of bait drives the fish away. A great variety of opinions exist in this respect, and it is hard to form a correct judgment on the subject. Q. Have you known mackerel seining to be successful in the gulf 3– A. No, not as a general thing. I have known vessels thus get a fare of fish, but, as a general thing, it has been a failure. Q. What is the reason of this?—A. Well, I think one reason for it is due to the clearness of the water in the bay, and another is because the Water where the mackerel frequent is shallow, and too shallow to admit of the use of the large seines which the fishermen are in the habit of using on the American shore; then again the character of the bottom in the bay—it is rapid and rocky—is such that it catches the seines. Q. It has been stated here that they could adapt these seines to shal- low water. What is your opinion on this point %—A. Well, I have heard that; but then again, I have heard it said that for mackerel, Owing to its shyness, you want to be able to get a good way under them to thus bag them successfully; if they see the twine, they make a rush to get out from under it; that is the reason which numbers give for not trying their Seines in the bay. These Seines have been a great deal enlarged, and made larger and deeper in order to enable the fishermen to get around and under the schools without frightening and disturb- ing the fish. Q. So these seines have grown longer and deeper instead of shorter and shallower ?—A. Yes, a great deal. I do not know but that they Inow have reached their maximum. Q. Is any considerable quantity of mackerel sold in the British Provinces 3–A. In my experience, such sales have been pretty small. I have, however, sold a few in Canada. Q. Have you tried the Dominion market?—A. I have sold a few fish, but not many in it. I have shipped fish here, and had them reshipped to the States via the lakes. Q. You have found that they could not be sold here?—A. Yes. Q. How far have you sent them in Canada. ?—A. As far as Montreal. Q. No farther?—A. I do not remember of sending them any farther. Q. Is there any market for fat mackerel, number ones and twos, except in the United States?—A. No ; no considerable market; that is the market for mackerel, and particularly for fat mackerel. I suppose *: is hardly a fraction of the whole catch that goes to any other market. 2748 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Where do the poorest grades go?—A. These are used in the West Indies; but the fat mackerel do not answer for the West India market; it does not stand the voyage. I suppose that is the reason why they do not ship the best qualities there. Q. Suppose that the catch of mackerel in British waters suddenly ceased, and that none were there caught for a period of five years, what would be the effect thus produced in the United States market 2—A. Well, that would depend on how good a catch they would then have on the American shore. - Q. What would be the proportion ?—A. I should suppose that the proportion of the supply which is caught in British waters would be, perhaps, one-fourth of the aggregate catch. - - Q. That is inshore, off shore, and everywhere?—A. Yes; of the whole aggregate catch on the United States and Dominion coasts, perhaps one-quarter would be taken in British waters. Then, mackerel not being an indispensable article of food, I do not suppose that such cessation would have a very great effect; particularly in view of the fact that prices, in my opinion, could not be forced very high, even with a small catch. Q. Which is the most important article of food in the United States, fresh or salt mackerel ?—A.. I should say, fresh mackerel decidedly; there is a larger consumption of them; but then there are seasons in the year, as in winter, when people can get poultry of all kinds and fresh meats, when they do not care much about these fish. This is the com- plaint which fish-dealers make in this respect; farmers in particular prefer to use their own products to paying high prices for fish. Q. One witness told us that every American family put down a barrel of mackerel and a barrel of pork to live on during the winter; does that statement correspond with any opinion which you have on this subject 3 —A. I do not know as to how it may be outside of the limits of New England, but I think that very few New England families lay in a bar- rel of mackerel for consumption. * Q. Do you know what quantity of fish comes from the great lakes of the West ?—A.. I do not; I have heard the quantity stated quite differ- ently, but I have no data to speak from in reference to this matter. Q. Have you had anything to do with herring caught at the Magda- len Islands?—A. Yes; we have had a good deal to do with them. Q. What did you procure them for 7—A. So far as I have obtained them, it has been chiefly for bait, but I think that a good many of these herring have been exported from Charlottetown to the West Indies and the States. Q. Have you bought or caught them 7–A.. I have done both. Q. Did you send your vessels to the Magdalen Islands º–A. Yes; with the means both for catching and buying herring. Q. At what rate can you usually have Magdalen Island herring de- livered on Prince Edward Island %–A. Well, for $1, or $1.25 a barrel, without the barrel. # Q. Would the barrel be worth $1%—A. The barrel and the salt for packing would be worth about $1. Q. At what price, furnishing the barrels, can you obtain these fish 3— A. We then pay about $1 for them. Q. Do you furnish your own salt 3–A. They are all salted. Q. And you can thus get them for that price 7–A. Yes. Q. What would be the effect of a duty of $1 a barrel on pickled her- ring, as to the possibility of their being sent from the Dominion to the United States market?—A. Well, if American vessels had no right to Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2749 º catch them at the Magdalen Islands, this might not affect their sale; but if they then came into competition with what the American vessels Caught, these fish could not be sent there. Q. Would this amount be a prohibition duty, in this respect 2—A. I. should think so. Q. How was the removal of the duties on mackerel and other fish, through the Washington Treaty, regarded by the inhabitants of Prince Edward Island 7—A. As far as my observation went, they were very eager to have this treaty, in this regard, go into effect ; they thought, that this would build up their business, and be of great benefit to them. Q. What effect, in your judgment, would a return of these duties have 3—A. It would have a very bad effect unquestionably. It would hurt the fisheries there, because a great many of the fishermen, and the best fishermen we have now, would then at once go on board of Ameri- can vessels, as they formerly did. A large number of the island fisher- men formerly fished in American vessels; and a great many of them Would under such circumstances go back, while they are now carrying On the boat fishery. Q. In your boat-fishing you use herring more than pogies, because: the former are cheaper than the latter 2—A. Yes. - Q. Can vessel mackerel-fishing be successfully prosecuted without pogie bait 3–A.. I do not know but that it might ; but they never use anything save pogies. As far as I have learned it is very rare when they do otherwise. I have in one or two instances heard skippers say that if they used herring, and a great deal more of them, perhaps they could get just as good trips as with pogies; but one might say that and a hundred might say the opposite. Q. Have you the prices of mackerel with you ?—A. I have them for a few years—perhaps for the past five or six years. Q. What are they 3–A. These are the net sales of mackerel in Boston market. Q. Are they the actual result of your business derived from your books 2—A. No ; I cannot exactly say that. This is merely an esti- mate. - Q. Mention the prices.—A. In 1876, last year, the average net value of mackerel at the island was about $9, as the result of Sales in Boston. Q. That is what you realized ?–A. This is about what we realized for the catch. Q. Give the other prices.—A. In 1875 we make it about $11; in 1874, about $7.25; and in 1873, about $11.50. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg: Q. Are these the average prices for all grades?—A. Yes. By Mr. Foster: Q. Continue the list.—A. In 1872 such price was about $8, and in 1871 it was about $4,10. Q. What do you mean by net price º–A. This is the result after the bait, freight, duties, commissions, wharfage, and other expenses are Settled. Q. The barrels and salt excepted ?–A. We do not take that. When We ship a barrel of mackerel it is all barreled up and ready for market. Q. The mackerel catch of Prince Edward Island for last year, 1876, is estimated in the report of the Dominion commissioner of fisheries at 25,383 barrels, and the export of mackerel for the same year is estimated. at 9,347; barrels. Then, of course, 16,000 barrels must have been con- Sumed at the island, if these figures are correct; and I want to know 2750 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. how far this corresponds with your belief?—A. Well, I think that the figures for the exports are not accurate, because I believe that some mackerel were exported for which the figures have not found their way into the Custom-house returns. - Q. What do you think that such exports from Prince Edward Island amounted to for 1876?–A. 11,000 or 12,000 barrels; I would not say that they exceeded 12,000. A Q. Are you confident about that %—A.. I feel very confident about it, but I cannot speak positively in this respect. Q. Explain what your opportunities for obtaining knowledge on that subject are 7–A. Well, taking this matter one way, I judge from the number of boats which I have engaged in the mackerel fishery, and the number of boats which it is estimated is so engaged around the island. I take the average catch of the whole number of boats which it is esti- mated to fish about the island, and from this calculation I estimate that the exports of mackerel would not exceed 11,000 or 12,000 barrels. Q. I notice that, in his report, the aggregate product of all the fish- eries of Prince Edward Island is valued at $494,967.08, and the total fish exports are valued at $169,714, leaving for consumption on the island, fish to the value of $225,253.08; what do you say to these fig- ures for 1876?–A. The consumption of fish on the island, besides mack- erel, is pretty large; the island people consume a large quantity of her- ring and a considerable quantity of codfish ; but I should think that these figures are rather astray. Z Q. How much are they astray, according to your best judgment 2 What do you say to the aggregate yield of the fisheries of Prince Ed- ward Island for last year being valued at $494,967.08?—A. From the best figures which I have been able to make, I should not think that it exceeded one-half of that amount. Q. What do you say to the fish exports being valued at $169,714%— A. Well, I do not know that this is far astray. - Q. Now as to prices; codfish in this report is valued at $4.25 a hun- dred-weight"—A. Well, that is not very far out of the way. Cod were scarce and high last season, and that is aboñt a fair figure. + Q. The yield of the island herring fishery is estimated at 14,866 bar- rels for last year; you say that there is a large consumption of herring" on the island 2–A. Yes; but they do not use much poor herring. . . . Q. These herring are valued at $2.50 a barrel?—A. I should think that was a large estimate. Q. Mackerel are valued at $8 a barrel ?—A. Well, that is not out of the way; the price is small enough. Q. The yield of hake is estimated at 14,862 hundred-weight, valued at $2.50%—A. That is about what the market price was on the island. Q. The island yield of cod-tongues and sounds for last year is esti- mated at 594 barrels; what do you say to that ?—A. That is evidently a mistake; I do not think that there were any produced or shipped there last year—that is, any to speak of. * Q. The yield of fish-oil is estimated at 16,487 gallons, valued at 65 cents a gallon 3––A. The price is about 15 cents too high. & Q. It is entered that 2,590 gallons of fish-oil were exported, and 16,487 gallons produced 3–A. That is too high a figure. Q. Do they use 14,000 gallons of fish-oil on the island 3–A. I do not think so; at any rate, so many gallons of oil as is there mentioned are not produced on the island, unless the figure is made up by importation from other places. Q. The return of the number of fishermen on the island is given as AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2751 3,831; what do you say to that ?—A. I do not know that this figure is out of the way. I did not suppose that there was quite so many, but this may be the case. Q. According to those figures, each fisherman would get $128 worth of fish a year; what do you say to that ? I notice that they are not so prosperous as the fishermen of New Brunswick, who are stated to have made a catch of fish valued in all at $1,953,088, and their number being 3,850, it seems that they would earn $510 a head.—A. I should think that the figures for the island were pretty high ; $25 a month would be pretty good wages for fishermen there, for the season of four or four and a half months. +. - Q. What do you pay your fishermen 3–A. Ihave men fishing in a variety of Ways; but from the larger part of them I buy the fish fresh, paying them so much per hundred. Q. That is for the men who fish in the larger portion of those 150 boats 3—A. Yes. We own a few of the larger boats, and we receive for the use of these boats one-eighth of the catch, while they furnish their provisions and bait, and everything else they require, and we pay them so much per barrel for the fish when salted; then there are other boats from which we take the fish fresh and cure them, taking the fish round from the boats. These men find themselves, and we pay them so much per hundred for their fish through the season. Q. How much do you pay them ?—A. This season I paid them $1.35 per hundred mackerel; from the commencement to the end of the season, I did so. Q. For any kind of mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. That was fit to pack 3–A. Yes; and I found the bait and boat. Q. Did you find everything ?—A. Yes; provisions excepted. I found the bait and boat, and paid them that amount. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. How much did you pay when the men owned their boats 3–A. Where they owned their own boats—these are mostly small and of mod- erate value—I paid them $10 or $12 a year extra for the use of their boats, but I have very few men of that description. By Mr. Foster : Q. But still you paid them the same price as the others for their mack- erel 3—A. Yes; we allowed them that amount for the use of their boats for the season. - Q. How many mackerel are there to a barrel ?—A. They will average this year about 280, I should say; perhaps the number would be 260 or 280. º Q. Would the extreme points be 200 and 300 a barrel?—A. No ; the highest number would be 350; this is for early mackerel when they are p00r. * Q. And how many would there be of the biggest mackerel ?–A. Not Over a hundred. ! Q. This would be of the very best ?–A. Yes. - Q. The biggest average catch would be 240 or 250 to the barrel ?— A. Yes; or 260. Q. How good an average catch of mackerel can your fishermen and the fishermen of Prince Edward Island make 3–A. There is a great difference in fishermen ; some will make double the catch that others will at the same stage; some boats will earn double what others will make ; Some men understand the catching of the fish or the baiting of them better than others; for this or some other reason, at any rate, they 2752 AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. will catch many more fish than others; but the best men will perhaps earn $125 or $130, while the lowest amount thus earned will be perhaps $75 a season. Q. Is this when they are furnished with boats 3–A. Yes, and with bait, being subject to no expense save that of feeding themselves, and they live very cheaply. - Q. How long would be the fishing season during which they would earn $125 or $130 %–A. Four or four and a half months. Q. Is there any winter employment on the island 3—A. O, yes; a great many of the younger men leave the island in winter, and go over to Mirimichi, N. B., and work in the woods, spending the winter there and returning in the spring. Quite a number do so. Q. If they stay on the island, can they earn wages in the winter 2– A. A great many of these fishermen have farms, and in winter some get out firewood while others get out cooperage-stock, hoop poles, and staves. They find something to do in winter, but they do not earn a great deal. Most of them have farms—some small ones and some large OL162S. - Q. What do you say about the value of mackerel swimming, where they are thickest ?—A.. I do not think that my head is clear enough to answer that question. Q. Have you ever known any place where the fishermen as a class get more than a bare ordinary living on the average %–A. Some of our fishermen are very well off; but then they have farms right adjoining the fishing grounds. Q. How good a chance have you where you are located of seeing the boats and vessels engaged in fishing %–A. I am there all the time, for four or five months, and I have an opportunity of seeing them daily from the time that I get up until dark ; I might constantly look off on the water during the day from where I am. Q. Could any one with a pair of eyes have more constant opportunity of seeing the whole thing than you have for 30 miles’ distance 3—A. I do not think that any one has a better opportunity than myself for See- ing what is going on on the water for the four or five months that I am there. Q. I understand you to say that if the duty on mackerel was reim- posed in the United States, your firm would, except for a small portion. of the season, give up the mackerel business, and turn your attention to Something else 3—A. That is my opinion decidedly. \ Q. If you could get rid of your property what would you do in that eventº–A. If I could get rid of it at anything like reasonably fair value, I should then put it into the market, and go into something else. Q. If you were going to carry on the mackerel fishery in vessels from Brince Edward Island, would you resort to the United States coasts at all; and, if so, why, and how %–A. Well, I think I should then be in favor, for a portion of the year at any rate, of trying the fishing on the American coast, that is, if we could get captains and crews that would like to follow that business; and I suppose that a great many of them Would do so. sº Q. Do you mean with hooks and lines, or with seines, or with both 3– A. I do not know so much about it as to say. I should want to study up this question before deciding on that point, because I think that Seining is getting rather played out, so they say. Q. You think that it is ?—A. I think they have had pretty near enough of it, and I do not know how profitable it would be to prosecute. hook and line fishing there. - - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2753. Q. Here is an account of a Portland schooner which got 1,265 barrels seining this year.—A. Yes; but I think that is an exception. I do not think that you would find a great many catches of that kind. Dy Sir Alexander Galt : Q. You know all about the quality of the fish taken on the American coast 7 You are well acquainted with this subject 3–A. Generally Speaking, yes. Q. What proportion does the best quality of fish taken there bear to the poorer ones?—A. Well, this season, of the best quality, as I under- stand it, scarcely any have been taken; on that shore there has been a very small catch of very good mackerel this year; but this varies very materially different years. You will see by the reports of the inspectors, or by their returns, that a very large catch of number ones will have been taken one year, while perhaps the next year the catch may run very largely of number threes. The quality of the catch varies almost every year. -- Q. We are told that the first caught early in the season, both off the American coast and in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, are poor 7—A, O, yes; they are always poor in the spring, and then they gradually fatten up. Some seasons they fatten up more rapidly than they do during other Seasons. Some seasons good mackerel are caught in July and August, and in other seasons this is not the case. Q. Is the greater quantity of the fish that comes to market of the inferior or of the best qualities?—A. As I told you, this varies very much. Some years the larger quantity will consist of the best qualities, and other years, perhaps the very next season, it will be the direct J'éVel'Se. - 4 By Mr. Foster: Q. Whereabouts on the American coast have the best mackerel been found 7–A. Well, I see by the reports of this season that this has been at Block Island, and last year this was also the case, I think. Q. For a few years past, which have sold for the highest price—num- ber ones from the bay or number ones from the American shore ?—A. O, their shore mackerel have been the best quality of fish. Q. Some one the other day produced a Boston paper of recent date, in which Prince Edward Island mackerel—some of yours, I suppose?— A. Very likely. & Q. Were quoted higher than number ones shore mackerel; what does that mean 2–A. This is because they have caught very few mackerel of good quality on the American shore this season, but I am not speaking about this season, but of other years; perhaps in that same paper, a few weeks ago, Block Island mackerel were quoted a good deal higher than bay mackerel; but this season has been rather an exception to the ordinary rule, and they have caught poor mackerel on the American Shore, as I have understood. * Q. When is the time for the best catch over on the United States shore?—A. I think that it is over now, though they may get some good catches yet ; but this is hardly to be expected. Q. And the Season is over in the Gulf of St. Lawrence?—A. Yes, Sub- stantially so. Q. Of course, the spring mackerel are thin and poor wherever they are caught 3–A. Yes. Q. And very many more of them are caught off the United States coast than in the gulf?—A. Yes; they catch mackerel earlier there. A 173 F. 2754. Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. large catch of mackerel is taken South before we have them in the bay at all. Q. I suppose that the season during which there is mackerel-fishing both in the gulf and on the United States shore extends from the last of June until the middle of October 2—A. They commence fishing in the bay about the 20th of June, I should say. - Q. When it extends from the 20th of June to the middle of October, how does the quality of the catch in the gulf compare with the quality of the catch off the United States coast for the same months from year to year 3–A. Well, during the last five or six years, I think the best Quality has been taken, I think, on the American shore, but I have known it to be right the reverse, and the very best mackerel to be taken in the bay. Q. Where do the best mackerel in the bay come from ?–A. Well, I do not think that the mackerel taken at the different places vary much in quality; sometimes the best mackerel are taken at the Magdalen Islands, and sometimes they are got around the island; and sometimes away up about Gaspé the very best mackerel are obtained; and some- times this is the case farther north. Q. When you speak of round the island, do you mean within three miles of land, or farther out 2—A. O, well, I do not know that I had either in view ; speaking as a general thing, the larger mackerel are taken farther away from the shore. - Q. The collector at Port Mulgrave, in one of his returns for 1875, says that “the most of these mackerel”—-that is, the mackerel he speaks of as having been caught by 164 American vessels—“were caught about Prince Edward Island, that is the smaller-sized mackerel; but the best and largest were caught at the Magdalen Islands”?—A. Well, I know that one year, and perhaps more than one year, and during several years, I have heard it said by fish-dealers at Boston and other places that they got the better quality of mackerel from the Magdalen Islands. Q. I see that you are not going to run down Prince Edward Island mackerel ?—A. No. r By Mr. Dana : Q. I have understood that the mackerel as they grow fat in the autumn leave the northeastern part of the gulf and go down through the Gut of Canso, and around the other side, and pass along to the south- ward, and are to be found off Cape Cod and other parts of the American coast for a short time in November and the latter part of October in the very best condition ; is that so 7–A. I have heard that stated, and I have known them to be taken around Cape Cod late in the Season, and even later than the middle of November; but after November, and after the water begins to get cold there, they begin to get thin. Q. They then get thin again 3–A. Yes. - Q. And those that come down from here and get there by the middle of October have been reported as being remarkably good, and up to the 1st of November the fish are remarkably good ; and then, for that class of fish, the market is not over in the United States?—A. Well, it is not then over every year. Q. In the middle of October 2—A. They get them there in nets, rot so much with hooks. I don’t think the mackerel take the hook. Many are of the opinion that they are not the same kind of mackerel but a different species. I have heard so. - Q. Some think the mackerel have been fattened up in the bay and come down, and others think it is not so. But at all events your mack- *} AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2755 erel, so far as you have heard of the catch, have not increased ?–A. They have not. - q By Mr. Davies: Q. Practically the fishing off the American coast for the season is now over ?—A. I think so. º Q. There will be nothing more of any moment caught to affect the mackerel ?—A. I should hardly think so. There has been such a thing, but as a general thing we don’t look for mackerel after the middle of October. Q. This year has been better than the average of years at the island 7– A. I think it has. Q. Has it not been a very excellent year 7–A. I think that, consider- ing the prices they have got and the quantity taken, it has been a very excellent year. Q. As regards the quality of the fish taken, what is the quality of the fish taken at the island this year 2–A. The quality of the fish has been poor. A very small proportion of the catch has been very good indeed; the rest has been poor, very poor. Q. Can you tell me what price you obtained for your mackerel this year 7–A. The prices in Boston in greenbacks are for 3's from $9 to $9.50; 2's, from $12.50 to $13; for 1's, so far as I have returns, from $16 to $18. Q. Are you selling at those prices or holding for higher ?—A. We are Selling as fast as we can get them into the market. Q. I suppose you find no difficulty in disposing of mackerel ?—A. No. 1’s go very hard. Early in the summer they were going pretty freely. The better grades of mackerel have gone very fairly, in consequence of the poor quality of the mackerel caught on the American shore. Q. You say the mackerel market is a very Sensitive market?—A. Yes. Q. It is regulated almost entirely by the supply, of course 3—A. Yes. Q. If there is a large catch prices fall; and if a small quality of catch sprices go up 3–A. That is the fact. What I mean by a sensitive mar- ket is this: There is a large fishing fleet, and of course the dealers are watching the fleet very closely to see what the vessels are doing, and if the reports are that they are catching mackerel the dealers will not buy more than they can sell to-day, and if there is much stock in the market it will have to be held. That is what I mean by a sensitive market. - Q. Then every year when the mackerel season is about half over the dealers find out what the catch has been and is likely to be, and the prices are regulated by the conclusion they arrive at. For instance, if the fleet have taken nothing half the season, and are not likely to catch many more, the prices will go up 3—A. The dealers, I think, carry on the business differently from what they did ten or fifteen years ago. I Čion’t think as a general thing they stock up anything like what they formerly did. I think they buy more from day to day. That is, I think their experience for the last five or six or six or eight years has been that it has been a losing business to stock up and carry mackerel. Q. Taking the whole American catch, with the exception of those taken at Block Island, do you mean to say that Prince Edward Island mackerel do not compare favorably with them 7–A. This year they do Compare favorably. § Q. More than favorably 7–A. More than favorably. What I mean to Say is, that No. 1 mackerel caught on the American shore are very much preferred to mackerel caught in the bay. They are of a different species, apparently, to the bay mackerel, and they are whiter, cleaner, 27.56 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. and fatter fish. There are some localities where they won’t buy bay mackerel at all if they know it. That is in the State of Pennsylvania. I heard a large dealer in New York say that his customers in Pennsylva- nia would not buy bay mackerel if they could get any other; in fact would not buy them at all. 4? * . Q. They prefer this different species?—A. It is a better fish. It is a better, whiter, and fatter fish. Q. Your opinion is that it is not the same species as the bay mack- erel?—A. I have almost come to that conclusion. I am rather inclined to think it is a different species of fish. Q. You have examined them. What is the result of your examina- tion ? Would you say it is a different species?—A. I should think so. One is larger than the other, and a whiter fish; what they feed on may make the difference. * Q. If mackerel came down from the bay and staid two or three days on the American shore, would they change in that way ?—A. I doubt very much whether they do that. e Q. Have you got any stages on the west side, from North Cape down to Miminegash 7–A. None at Miminegash. Two on that side of what we call the Reef and two along the coast. Q. The fishing at Miminegash is said to be very good this year?—A. Yes; particularly around Miminegash. Q. There is a place sometimes called by the name French Village %— A. Yes. -- ^, Q. It has been very good there?—A. Not so good there as further west at Miminegash. It has been very good there, and it has been very fair further along. ! Q. How has it been all around Cascumpeque 3–A. It has been very poor comparatively. Q. Your personal knowledge extends to that part of the island only ; you never fished at East Point?—A. No. - Q. You know nothing about the eastern end of the island 3–A. No. Q. Nor about the mode of fishing there?—A. No ; only from hear- Say. • Q. With regard to shore fishing. Where do your boats fish as a rule? Where is the bulk of the mackerel taken by boats?—A. I think on the side my store is on, off the east side of the island; that is, near North Cape; one-half of them are taken outside of three miles. On the other shore, I think more are caught within three miles. At Miminegash par- ticularly the fish are very near. Q. Are any taken outside 3—A. Yes. Q. Do small boats go out beyond three miles?—A. Yes; they do very frequently; but it varies in different years. The season of what we call the great catch, in 1874, I think the mackerel were caught close to the , shore then as a general thing. - g Q. Have you noticed if, during the last sixteen years, mackerel have been found closer to the shore than in 1855 and 1856%—A. Well, no; I think this year they have not been. Q. During the last few years has there not been a tendency that way ?—A. I don’t know but that there has. I should rather think there has been. Q. That is the opinion of most of the fishermen 3–A. Yes; I should Say SO. - %. You have noticed it sensibly so, I suppose 3—A. Well, I don’t know that I should have noticed it without my attention having been called to it. r AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2757 Q. Now that your attention has been called to it, do you say SO 3–A. I should say we catch more fish inside than we did five, six, or eight years ago. Q. You don't know how far off shore the fish are taken at other parts of the island 7–A. I only judge from what I have heard. Q. It is necessary in order to insure a fair catch to go inside with boats 3–A. Yes; I suppose so. * Q. You would not like to carry on fishing and be excluded from Com- ing within the three-mile limit 2–A. I should not. Q. You would abandon it at once %–A. Yes, I think so; that is, boat- fishing particularly. - Q. Has the Lettie been out fishing this year 3–A. Yes. Q. How many barrels has she taken 3–A. At last accounts about 300 barrels altogether. She landed 175 packed barrels on the first trip, and she was reported three weeks ago with 100 barrels. So I should say altogether about 300 barrels. That is rather—considerably above the average. º .* Q. Would you prosecute the fishing in the bay if you were prohibited from coming within three miles of the shore to fish 7–A. I don’t think I would. - * Q. Have you any doubt about it 3–A. I don’t think I would. That is if I was compelled to come here. I might go to the Magdalen Islands if I had a right there. Q. Suppose you could go to Magdalen Islands, and were excluded from three miles of the shore everywhere else in the bay ?—A. I don’t know, but I might try it, if forced to prosecute the fishery in the bay. It , does not take long to change berths. Q. Suppose you were excluded from changing your berth and were kept off shore ?—A.. I would not want to carry it on. If I had vessels fishing on the American shore and found slim fishing there, it would not take long for them to come down to Magdalen Islands, try there, and go back again. Perhaps two weeks. Q. Would you, under those circumstances, prosecute the bay fishery as a bay fishery, sending vessels there year after year to remain the sea- son, and depending on it for the season's work?—A. I don’t think I would. Q. Have you seen any large fleets of American vessels at your end of the island 3–A. I have. - Q. What is the largest number you have seen ?—A. I could not un- dertake to speak with accuracy, but I should say from 150 to 200 sail. Q. At one time 2—A. I think I have seen 150 vessels at one time. Q. Did they fish by coming in and drifting off?—A. That is the prac- tice. Of course wherever they find the fish they go, but if they found them near the land they would not undertake to fish in that way with an inshore wind. If there is a moderate wind off shore they come in, throw bait, and drift off, and work back again. Q. You have seen them fishing in and out of the limits 2—A. Yes. Q. Often ?—A. Yes. There have not been many vessels there for the last two or three years, but previous to that I used to see them quite frequently. Q. In fleets?—A. Yes, 30 or 40 sail. r Q. Day after day during the season?—A. I never saw them remain there a great while—perhaps one or two days. I don’t remember them remaining over two days in succession. - Q. Then they would return again?—A. Then they would go, perhaps 27.58 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. to the other side of the island and keep going round the island, or per" haps go to Magdalen Islands or Bay Chaleurs or Escuminac. - Q. Would they come back again that season 3–A. Very likely. They keep Cruising round all the time, as a general thing. If they go to Magdalen Islands and have good fishing they hang round there. Q. It is essential to the success of the vessels that they have the right to go wherever the mackerel are 3—A. To make it successful I should Say SO. Q. You were asked some questions with regard to the exports of the island and the provisions consumed and you said you thought they were much exaggerated. What means have you of forming an estimate of the catch of mackerel, say in Kings County ?—A. It was in 1876 we were examining, I think. I know very nearly the number of barrels I caught and what I exported. - Q. I am not questioning your own catch ; I am speaking with regard to the catch of the island. What means have you of knowing what mackerel, cod, or other fish were caught by the people of King's County, for instance?—A. I have not any means of giving an accurate state- ment. Q. Were you there that year 7—A. Yes. Q. In King's County 3–A. I was there but not for the purpose of making any special inquiries. The only knowledge I have is from what I heard and what I could gather as to the number of barrels the differ- ent localities had taken. I cannot say I give it accurately, but I ap- proximate it to the best of my judgment. Q. In that judgment you may be astray ?—A. Yes, I may be astray. Q. You made a guess at it, judging it from your own business %—A. I did very much so, and from what I could hear. Q. Do you know that there are fishery officers at Prince Edward Isl- and, and have been since confederation ?–A. Yes. g Q. Take Mr. Samuel Clark, fishery officer of Prince County; is he a respectable man 3–A. Yes; very much so. Q. A man on whose judgment you could place some confidence %—A. In farming matters, yes; not in fishing matters. Q. A man in whose veracity and integrity you would place Confi- dence %—A. Yes. Q. He stands very high in the county 2–A. Yes; and is very much respected. - * Q. Do you know that he made it his business to inquire at the differ- ent establishments what their catches were ?—A. I don’t know that he did. I don’t know that he ever inquired at my place. He might have asked some of my men. Q. He might have asked some of your head men 3—A. Yes. Q. He would not willfully put down anything that he knew to be Wrong?—A. I should not suppose so. Q. He is not a man to do so?—A. No. Q. In 1876 the exports are put down as of the value of $169,000 %– A. Yes. Q. That is probably below the mark, is it not ?—A. I should think it was not above the mark. Q. Quantities of fish leave the island, go to Shediac, and are shipped from there without being entered ?–A. Yes. - Q. Do you know that as a matter of fact º–A. They always clear Out. the custom-house, but whether those quantities go into the returns at Charlottetown I don't know. We generally take clearances at Tignish, and sometimes when the vessels are half or three quarters loaded, and AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 27.59 a wind springs up, they have to go, and they are as liable to run into Shediac as elsewhere and land their cargoes. \ Q. Those cargoes do not appear in the returns?—A. I should be in- clined to think they do not. Q. You have stated that the people of the island consume large quantities of fish 7–A. I should judge they consume very little mack- erel. Q. You have no means of knowing accurately 7–A. No. Q. They live largely upon fish 7–A. Yes. Q. Have you examined the census to see how many families there are On the island 7–A. I should make a rough guess at 20,000. Q. When you say this is an exaggeration, it is a rough figure ?—A. Not altogether. I know pretty nearly my own catch, and also what is Caught round that end of the island. Q. I am not speaking of the catch 3–A. You have to get the catch to get the consumption. In knowing what my own place takes I have Some better knowledge as to what the whole island takes than a person Who knows nothing at all about it. Q. How many families do you say there are ?—A. 20,000; I don’t know that that statement is correct, for they are pretty large families generally. There ought to be that number with a population of one hundred thousand. Q. What quantity of fish of all kinds do they consume per family 7– A. They largely consume herring if they can get it. If they can get herring they don’t care much about any other fish. All of our fisher- men—and there are a good many of them—pick up a few codfish and carry home, and it amounts in the aggregate to a considerable quantity. I took that into account when I made my estimate. As a general thing they use herring. Q. But you are not prepared to say how much, or about how much, each family uses of all kinds of fish 7–A. No. Q. I want to know how you get at your estimate 3–A. I get at it from estimating what my own boats catch, and estimating the catch of the island from that. Q. Those prices which you give for the years, from 1871 to 1875, are they not cash receipts which you put into your pocket after paying all expenses?—A. I make that as an estimate; that is not the exact figure. I only gave it considerable thought between yesterday and to-day. Q. You have a branch of your business at Boston ?—A. We have had. Q. You carried on business there and sold fish 7–A. Yes. A"; You bought fish on the island largely, and sold them there too !— . Y. 62.S. - Q. Have you examined the statistics of the United States with a view to ascertaining how many mackerel are taken on their shores 3–A. I have every year obtained the returns of the inspector-general of Massa- chusetts. - * Q. About how many are taken 7–A. I should say, on an average, * *achusetts inspection would average, perhaps, 234,000 or 240,000 3.TI'GIS. Q. Eish taken by American vessels?—A. Yes. Q. Altogether everywhere ?—A. Inspected in the State of Massa- chusetts. That is the total catch of Massachusetts vessels, and perhaps Some vessels from Maine which come there and pack out. Those are What are packed out by vessels in every district of Massachusetts. Q. The mackerel fishing is in Massachusetts chiefly 7–A. It is the leading State for mackerel fishing. 2760 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What other statistics did you examine 7–A. Not those of any Other State. - Q. Does that return give you the quantity taken by those vessels on the American shore and the quantity taken on the British shore ?—A. There is no distinction made; they are all put together. - Q. When you said that one quarter of the aggregate catch was taken in British waters, what did you mean 2–A. I mean by that, that if the whole catch of mackerel in the State of Maine and Massachusetts amounts to 280,000 barrels, and you add the Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island catch, which might amount to 40,000 or 50,000 barrels, that would be 330,000. I took one-fourth of that. It is merely an esti- mate. Q. You don’t know what proportion of the fish are taken in British and what in American waters ?—A. I can tell when a very small fleet comes into British waters and has poor success, that it will not add largely to the aggregate quantity. Q. You understand me to be speaking of the whole gulf and not of the three-mile limit 3–A. I understand. Q. When you say that one-fourth only of the aggregate catch is taken in British waters did you mean to include the catch taken by British people, or did you mean that the Americans themselves catch one-fourth on our shores?—A. I mean to say that aside from what are caught by American vessels, what are caught at Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia, which are the two principal places where mackerel are taken by their own people, amount as near as I can estimate without going into figures, to one-fourth of the gross aggregate catch. Q. There is a little point regarding which I wish to put myself right before the Commission. I stated the other day here that there was no inspector of fish on Prince Edward Island. Now, have you paid any in- Spector for the last two or three years since confederation ?—A.. I am very certain that every year I paid the inspection fee to the general in- spector of Prince County. “s Q. Since confederation ?—A. Yes. I talked the matter over this Sea- Son with my bookkeeper as to whether it was best to pay that again, and he concluded it was. Q. It enabled you to send your fish into Massachusetts. You are deputy inspector and you put your brand on your mackerel as such, and it is a benefit in that way to you?—A. I consider it so. Q. If it was not a benefit you would not continue it 3–A. I do not think it is worth while to disturb the thing at all. I never saw that he was very reluctant to receive his fees. Q. From your knowledge of the people of the United States and those engaged in fishing, are they anxious to have the right to fish in our Waters—are the people greatly anxious to have it 3–A. I don’t kown what the feeling is at the present time, but in former years, from conver- sations that I have had with them, I should say that they were anxious to have the right of fishing here, particularly those having expensive Ves- sels here. They want full range of the whole waters of the Dominion, and, of course, those who own expensive vessels do not want them to be disturbed by cutters. Q. It was looked upon as a valuable privilege—the right to come into the gulf and fish 3—A. Yes. - Q. Near the shores 7–A. Yes. There was a great difference of opin- ion among fishermen and among skippers of vessels about it ; some did not seem to care much about it and some did. Q. That accounts for the fact that some of the witnesses have said AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 27.6:1 that they caught fish around Prince Edward Island and some did not ?— A. A good many men fishing in American vessels, perhaps, were natives of the island, or natives of Nova Scotia, and familiar with those shores. Of course, those would fish where perhaps others, such as Cape Cod vessels, would not, for they did not care so much to come into the Vicinity of the land. Q. The island skippers would come close to the shores of the island, while others would keep out?—A. Yes; those who were familiar with all the harbors and bays round the island, particularly those familiar with the harbors, for they would want to make for the harbors in a gale of wind. Those familiar with the harbors would not hesitate to fish round the shores, but a great many would hardly care to fish round the bend of the island at all. Q. Those not acquainted with the place?—A. Yes. Q. You have never fished at Magdalen Island yourself"—A. No. Q. You confine your operations to Prince Edward Island 2–A. Yes. Q. Your fishing stages are round the island 3–A. Yes. Q. You prefer to remain there ?—A. That is where the outlay has been made, and I would not care to extend it. Q. You would not care to go to Magdalen Islands and start business there 2–A. I would not. I don’t, however, pretend to know anything about Magdalen Islands. It may be a better place to fish, but any one Who has made a large investment at a certain place would not care to ex- tend it or change it. It takes a large amount of capital to get an exten- sive fishery started. You have to have a good many buildings, grounds, and Wharves, and other accessories to make it a success. - Q. You were speaking about the effect of the United States imposing a duty on herring. The United States market is not the sole market for herring 2—A. No ; by no means, though it is a very large market. Q. So if they did impose a duty amounting to prohibition they would themselves suffer as much as anybody else ?—A. It would not destroy the fishing altogether, of course. It is very desirable, however, to have all the market you can get for your fish. Q. And it is very desirable for the consumer to have all the fish com- ing in that he requires 7–A. Yes. * Q. What is the price of pogies 2—A. I think about an average price Would be from $4 to $5 a barrel. Q. Where; at the island?—A. In Boston. By Mr. Foster : Q. What are pogies worth in the island 7—A. The cost to bring them by steamer would be about 50 cents a barrel. If they charged for them $5 in Boston they would cost $5.50 landed at Charlottetown. Q. Suppose the three-mile line marked out by a line of buoys so that eVery One Could see when he was in and when out, and there was no dan- ger of molestation outside, how important do you think United States fish- ermen Would regard it 3–A. Well, I cannot say. I should suppose they would, of course, attach some importance to the privilege of coming inshore, but I don’t think that it would stop their prosecuting the fish- eries in the gulf. * * Q. What was the real thing that made our people anxious about this? for you know. What was the real trouble that made them anxious about the removal of the restriction ?—A. Well, they want to come here without the expense of a license, and want to be free from annoy- ance from cutters, and, of course, they want to go where they please. They don’t want to be restricted. If they find mackerel at any place, they want the privilege of catching them. 27.62 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Do you think the United States mackerel fleet could afford to pay a license-fee of $2 a ton, which was asked in the year 1868?–A. I should not suppose they could. - Q. As a matter of money, was it worth that ?—A. I should not think it would be. - Q. When the license-fee was fifty cents a ton, did they nearly all pay it 2—A. I think they did. - | Q. And when it was $1 per ton ?—A. I think some paid it. Q. And when it was $2 per ton 3–A. I think they generally took the risk, or else kept out to sea and did not frequent the limits. Q. Then, in your judgment, $2 per ton is a higher tariff than the privilege is worth in money º–A. Most distinctly it is, taking the three last years as a criterion. Q. Go back to the years when it was put on.—A. I should say, to give my own opinion, it would be prohibitory, even taking the whole range of the years; but for the three last years there has been scarcely a vessel that has made any money, though having free access to all the shores and bays. Q. Now, if a man's vessel got seized, how much difference would it make whether it was seized rightly or wrongly 7–A. If seized and de- tained for any time, it breaks up the voyage and the men would leave, and it would be a great disaster to the owner in every way. Q. If he had every advantage %–A. If everything was favorable. Q. And supposing litigation in the admiralty courts of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick was not costly 3–A. Yes. \ Q. Do you know about the sale of fresh fish in Charlottetown ; your firm sells it 3–A. Yes. - Q. Do you know how much mackerel they sell ?—A. Not personally. I am told the amount is very small, except fresh mackerel—they sell a good many fresh. Q. You were asked whether you would come to the gulf on mackerel fishing exclusively, if you were excluded from the three-mile limits 2 Suppose you were located in the United States, and had the benefit of fishing on the United States shore, would you send a mackerel schooner down here 3—A. I do not think so, from my personal knowledge of the Imatter. Q. Your firm is established here, with a property that cannot be re- moved ?—A. It cannot be removed. It is a large investment—the accumulation of many years. t Q. Are not United States mackerel schooners generally abandoning the gulf fishery 3–A. It would seem so from the experience of the last few years; but they may take hold again. If mackerel should appear in large quantities in the gulf, and there was a scarcity at home, they Would come here again. Q. Wherever there is a chance to make money, there enterprise will be of course.—A. There have been seasons and sections of seasons per- haps years ago when mackerel were scarce and they made very poor Voyages. Q. You spoke of the statistics of the quantity of mackerel inspected. In Massachusetts there are accurate statistics of the number of barrels of mackerel inspected ?–A. They are supposed to be correct. Each deputy inspector makes a return once a year. - Q. And that embraces all the salt mackerel that comes in in United States vessels?—A. Yes. - w Q. It also includes, does it not, all mackerel imported from the prov- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2763 inces which chances to be reinspected?—A. I am not certain whether that covers reinspected mackerel or not, but I think it does. Q. The statistics of Maine are in pretty poor shape, I believe 3–A. T. don't know much about them. I only approximate to the catch of Maine. Q. I want to see what your estimate was—how many barrels. The quantity varies greatly from year to year 3–A. Yes. Q. Immensely?—A. Yes. Q. So it is a difficult thing to make an average of?—A. Yes; one year it was as low as 100,000 barrels, and another as high as 340,000 barrels. w Q. What was the average?—A. I think I said 240,000 or 250,000 barrels. \ Q. What did you estimate that to be—the quantity inspected in Mas- sachusetts 3–A. The Massachusetts inspection. Q. Then there would be the Maine inspection ?–A. Yes. Q. Can you estimate that ?–A. Maine has been falling off greatly for the last 10 or 15 years, and they have carried on the business much less extensively than formerly. A great many Maine vessels make their headquarters at Boston and pack out there. Q. The whole business is centering in Gloucester 3—A. Yes. Q. And other fishing towns are dying out?—A. Yes; the Maine towns particularly have been dying for 20 years. Q. So that the salt-mackerel business is concentrating in Gloucester?— A. Yes. Q. You say that 225,000 or 230,000 is the Massachusetts inspection; I don’t know whether you could hazard an estimate for Maine"—A. I could not. Q. You know, generally, whether it is 10,000 or 50,000 barrels?—A. It would be more than 10,000 barrels; Portland alone would be more than 10,000. I would sooner say it would be 40,000 or 50,000 barrels. Q. Those quantities together make 270,000 or 275,000 barrels. In addition to those there is what comes from the provinces, the British catch; what do you estimate the British catch to be 3—A. The average British catch? Q. Yes.—A. I should say from 70,000 to 80,000 barrels. Q. And of that how much comes to the States?—A. I should Say more than three-fourths. Q. To what port does that chiefly come 2—A. Boston takes, I think, the geater portion; New York, of late years, has taken more than for- merly. - Q. Can you make an estimate of the quantity taken by New York?— A. No ; but I know a good many more go to New York than formerly. Q. Those are about the only places?—A. Yes; I don’t know but that Some go to Philadelphia—not a great many. Q. You were asked with regard to your knowledge as to the quantity of fish consumed upon the island; Mr. Howland is the gentleman who makes up statistics there ?—A. I cannot say. Q. He estimates, I see, on page 77 of the British evidence, that there are 15 per cent. of the mackerel sold to go off the island that do not get into the exports; so his estimate would be that there are $92,000 worth of mackerel that goes off the island. What do you say to that ?—A. He makes that up for one year, does he not? * f Q. Yes. He was going on the basis of 1876, and was correcting offi- cial statistics 3–A. I should think that was not very much out of the Way. - 27.64 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Then his estimate is that 25 per cent. of that amount would be consumed on the island—one-fourth of $92,000?—A. I think he is there very much astray. -- Q. His estimate is that one-fourth, which is $23,000, would be con- sumed on the island 7–A. I think he is very much Out. Q. You don’t think the people of the island eat $23,000 worth 3–A. Not of mackerel. They eat very few mackerel; they eat more largely Of other fish. By Mr. Davies: Q. Some of the witnesses, who have been captains of American ves- sels, have said they caught nearly three-fourths, some one-half, others one-fifth and one-eighth of their fish within three miles of the shore in the gulf. You spoke, in answer to Mr. Foster, about the $2 duty per ton being so large they could not pay it to go inside. As a matter of fact, at the time when they did not take out licenses, did they not poach on the preserves and come in and run the risk *—A. Some vessels did, Some did not. Q. Because I find that for a vessel of 60 tons, at $2 per ton, the amount would only be $120, and 10 barrels of mackerel at $12 a barrel would cover that.—A. But if they were just making both ends meet, $120 would turn the scale. - - Q. I have not found any witness who did not acknowledge he caught Some inside.—A. I am speaking in general terms. They would take that cost into account in making up the voyage for the vessel, and that might very readily turn the scale. The owners might discuss the ques- tion whether they would send the vessel to the bay or on their own shores, and when they put down $120 that might determine the trip. Q. You don’t know the proportion of the fleet that ran the risk *—A. I have not any means of knowing. Q. I think I understand you to say that catching mackerel by sein- ing injures the fishing?—A. That is my opinion. Some other witness would be able to give better evidence on that point. I can only say SO from hearsay. By Mr. Kellogg: Q. You have had experience in the fishing business in the Provinces and also in Boston. It is said frequently that mackerel will bring only a certain price in the American market, and that if they exceed a cer- tain price the people resort to other kinds for food. Have you in your experience discovered whether they were any other kinds of fish food they resorted to, particularly when mackerel were a high price; and if so, what kinds of fish are they 3–A. The lake fish of late years have been taken in large quantities and have supplied the markets to some extent. A large amount of territory is covered by them, and a great many like them and give them the preference. Q. Any other kinds of sea fish 7–A. They use largely fresh fish now. For instance, frozen herring are taken in very large quantities from Newfoundland and the Bay of Fundy. Q. What I want to know is this; if, when mackerel are at a certain º the people resort to other kinds of food that are cheaper ?—A. ..Y. 62.S. Q. In regard to the market for fresh mackerel; when did that market begin to expand, the fish going from the sea shore by the railways over the country 3–A. It has been growing very rapidly for the last 12 or 15 years, say for the last 12 years. - - *. Q. IS it now growing or not ?—A.. I think it is growing. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2765 Q. How far do fresh mackerel go?—A.. I don’t know there is any limit. Q. Do you know of any fresh mackerel being carried to California. from our side?--A. I should think not. I don't know but they might carry it. Q. They send lobsters canned ?–A. And they send fresh salmon in cans from California here. Q. According to your experience, how far up and down the Mississippi Valley does the fresh fish go?—A. It goes to Chicago and Milwaukee and other Western points. Q. You have been engaged in the mackerel and cod-fishing at Prince Edward Island for a good many years, and you are located there. Have you ever attempted to cure codfish in the way they are cured for foreign markets, for warm climates, such as the West Indies 3–A. I cure cod- fish almost exclusively for foreign markets in warm climates. Q. Is that done very extensively by any except what are called Jersey- men —A. It is. Q. Have you always done it 3–A. I have done it for 12 or 15 years. Q. And always exported to foreign markets?—A. Yes, almost always. Q. Did you ever find a market for that kind of cured fish in the United States ?—A. For the large fish we do. - Q. Cured in that way ?—A. Yes; for the large fish, but it is a small proportion of them. NO, 66. CHRESTEN NELSON, of Gloucester, Mass., fisherman and sailmaker, was called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. t By Mr. Dana: Question. What is your age 3—Answer. 52 years. Q. You are a native of what country 3–A. Denmark. Q. You now live at Gloucester ?–A. Yes. - Q. And have done so for how many years?—A. For about 30 years. Q. Do you recollect what was the first year you went into the gulf fishing ?—A. 1851. - Q. Did you go cod-fishing part of the Season 7–A. Yes. Q. Then you went into the gulf?—A. Yes. Q. How many trips did you make that year?—A. Two. Q. What did you catch the first trip 7–A. The first trip we caught 300 barrels and the second 325. Q. Did you catch those outside or inside?—A. The first trip we caught them entirely out of the limits; -the second trip we caught as far as Margaree; I think we got a very few inside the limits. - - Q. How many do you suppose, out of the 325 barrrls, did you catch at Margaree inside 3—A. I should think from 25 to 30 barrels. Q. In 1852 were you cod-fishing in the early part of the season and afterward in the bay ?—A. Yes. Q. How many trips did you make 3—A. One, and caught 350 barrels. Q. Of those how many were caught inside 3—A. I could not say very correctly, but I should say from 20 to 30 barrels. Q. In 1853 what were you doing?—A. I went into the bay in July; I was not fishing in the spring; I was working at Sail-making. Q. And how much did you get 2—A. 180 barrels. - Q. Where ?–A. Off on Banks Orphan and Bradley. There were none caught inshore that year. We did not so catch any ; and there Were very few mackerel in the bay. that year. t Q: Was this your last trip 2–A. Yes. 2766 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Now from your experience during those years, what do you think of the inshore fishery in the bay for such vessels as are sent out from Gloucester ? What is the value, everything considered, of the inshore fishery in the bay for such vessels as are used in the States ?—A. I should not consider it worth anything. Q. What are your objections to it'—A. It is very dangerous to fish inshore; our vessels are large and they want to be off shore in case a storm should come up. Q. In your experience you found that there were plenty of fish off shore ?—A. Yes, except the last year; there were not any fish in the bay that year save very few. Q. You are a sailmaker, and in 1853 you went back to your trade 2– A. I went into business in the fall of 1853. Q. And followed it up until when 2–A. 1864. Q. After that did you go into the fishing business, not as a fisherman but as a dealer?—A. Yes. Q. Had you a partner 7—A. Yes; Sargent S. Day. Q. What was the style of your firm º–A. Nelson & Day. Q. How long were you in it 7–A. From 1864 to 1869. Q. Do you count 1864 and 1869%—A. Yes; that is, I came out in the fall of 1869. Q. You are an outfitter and in the fishing business 7---A. Yes. Q. How many vessels did you usually manage %–A. We had six. Q. Were you interested in all of them —A. Yes, I think so; all except one. - Q. Some you owned ?–A. Yes. - Q. And you were interested in all of them except one 3—A. Yes. Q. In these cases had your skippers shares in the vessels?—A. Yes; they invariably held a small portion of them—one-quarter or something like that. - - Q. Is it customary in Gloucester for the skippers to take shares in vessels.?—A. Yes. - Q. Is it to the interest of the owners to interest them in their business in that way?—A. Yes; very much so. Q. When the owner makes such an arrangement with a skipper, giving him a share in the vessel, one-quarter, one-eighth, or one-half, how do they carry it out 2 Is the skipper entered at the custom-house as part owner & Has he a bill of sale %–A. In some cases this is done, but not in all cases. He sometimes receives obligations, to be given in a bill of sale when it is paid for. - Q. He sometimes has a bill of sale, and gives a mortgage back 3–A. Yes. - * Q. And sometimes a private agreement is made to give him a bill of sale when he pays for it 2–A. Yes. Q. While you were engaged in the fishing business during these five or six years, were you cod-fishing as well?—A. I was some early in the spring, but I was principally engaged in the bay fisheries, that is, the vessels were principally sent to the bay. Q. Were you fishing off the American coast at all ?—A. No, not much, except at George's Bank. Q. How did your bay fishing turn out?—A. Very slim. Q. Did you gain or lose by it 3–A. We lost by it. In that time we lost about all We had put into the concern. Q. How much did you put in ?—A. Somewhere in the vicinity of $15,000, I think. - Q. In what business had you made that ?—A. I made it principally AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2767 by sailmaking, though this was not the case with the whole of it. I made some by doing other business attached to my sailmaking business. Q. You put in a capital of about $14,000 or $15,000?—A. Yes. Q. Did you lose it all?—A. No, not the whole of it, but very nearly all. Q. To what was the loss due; the shore fishery, cod-fishing, or the bay fishery 3—A. Well, it was due to the bay fishery. We sent our vessels to the bay expecting to get something out of it, and we did not succeed. Q. Have you your books?—A. No ; what books I had were burned up last year when I was burned out. Q. During the time you were so engaged, how was your Bank fishing— fair?—A. Yes; it was fair. Q. How did your shore fishing turn out 2—A. That was very good. Q. Have you done anything in the fishing business since 1869%—A. No. Q. You then went back to your other business again 7–A. Yes. Q. How often does a fishing schooner need a new suit of sails on the average, if she is well handled and well managed ?–A. By good care a good Suit of sails will last two years. Q. And this requires good care?—A. Yes; I have known some cases Where a new suit of sails was worn out in one year. Q. Does a suit of Sails last a fishing vessel as long as a merchant- man 3–A. No. * * Q. A merchantman sails from one port to another, and furls her sails When she lies in port 2—A. Yes; and they are generally unbent when the vessel goes into port. Q. While fishing vessels are at it all the time?—A. Yes. Q. What did a new suit of sails cost during the war; not a fancy Suit, but a foresail, a mainsail, and a couple of jibs?—A. For a vessel . 90 or 100 tons a suit of sails of that kind then cost about $2,100 or 2,200. Q. How is it now %–A. The same suit would now cost between $500 and $600. Q. While you were pursuing the business, how much have you paid out for suits of sails on the average 3—A. I guess they cost us, while I Was in the business, about $800 a suit on the average. Q. What will rigging—running and standing rigging both, with blocks—delivered at the wharf, cost 2—A. From $1,000 to $1,200. Q. I suppose that some parts of the rigging wear out more rapidly than others?—A. Yes. r Q. Is the same material used in sails for fishing-vessels as for vessels in the merchant service 3—A. They are made with the same materials, but sometimes they are not made out of the same materials. They are made out of hemp or Russia canvas. Q. Russia duck?—A. Yes. Q. And not canvas?—A. Not cotton canvas; they are made out of Cotton and hemp canvas. Q. IS any better material to be had for sails for small vessels than Russia duck?—A. Yes; cotton is preferable. - Q. Does it cost more ?—A. It did not cost much more during the war. , Q. Cotton did not ?—A. No; but cotton cost the most during the Wal’. - { § Q. Your sails have been made since the war, and for many years past, Out of Russia duck?—A. No. Q. Out of what, then ?—A. Cotton. 2768 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. And that you think is the best material?—A. Yes; for our fishing vessels. • -- Q. It wears the longest ?—A. Yes. Q. And yet it won’t wear over two years 3–A. No. Q. You have had a good deal to do in fitting out vessels, &c.; what would a well-built vessel now cost, as she is launched, and what has such a vessel cost, say of 100 tons, built at Essex or Gloucester, on the average during the last five or six years ?—A. Without rigging or Sails 3 Q. Rigged but without provisions—what would she cost round º with sails and rigging 3–A. Such a vessel would be worth 7,500. Q. We will call it $8,000; suppose she cost this sum, what would her depreciation be for the first year, if nothing extraordinary happens, and if she is kept in good order, painted, and the rigging rove wherever this was required; what would the depreciation on her market value be in one year under such circumstances?—A. If I set it at $1,000 for the first year, that would be a very low sum. Q. That would be one-eighth of her whole cost 7–A. Yes; and that would be a very low figure. Q. What do you think her fair average depreciation would be 3–A. I should consider that a fair average would be $1,000 for one year's running from the time she first leaves the harbor; but it would go over that. - Q. It would more likely be more than less?—A. Yes. Q. What would it be after the first year, supposing she is kept in good order all the while and suffers no extraordinary injury 3–A. Perhaps it might be $500 or $600 a year. 4 Q. What is considered among persons who deal in these vessels to be the average life of a fishing-vessel, supposing that she is well built and well taken care of ? You count her as a fishing-vessel down to the time when it becomes difficult to insure her, and so long as a company will take her as fairly qualified to make fishing voyages?—A. Yes. I do not know about this, but I have understood from the people in Glouces- ter, who have figured it up, that the average life of a fishing-vessel is fourteen years, but then I have never made it a study to find it out for myself. Q. You take the current opinion in Gloucester on this point?—A. Yes. By Mr. Thomson : Q. Do I understand you to say that fourteen years is the longest period a Gloucestcr fishing-vessel lives 3–A. No. I think that there are vessels which are a great deal older, but on the average this is not the case. - Q. How old have you known them to be run in Gloucester ?—A. For twenty-five or thirty years, I think, and perhaps longer. Q. For vessels accustomed to fish in the Bay of St. Lawrence?—A. Yes. I think it is likely they have fished there. - Q. According to you, a vessel worth $8,000 would depreciate $1,000 a year 2—A. Yes, for the first year. t Q. And the next year she would depreciate in value $600 %–A. Yes, and I should think that would be a very low figure. Q. And the next year how much would it be 4–A. Less. Q. At what time would the depreciation stop altogether?—A, O, Well, after a vessel has depreciated for 4 or 5 years, she does not depreciate any more for a number of years. * - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2769 Q. Does she get better after that ?—A. I do not think she then gets any better, but she does not afterwards show depreciation so much. Q. In what does the depreciation, which you are pleased to put down at $1,000 for the first year, consist 2—A. Well, in sails and rigging and wear of the vessel. Q. If she is properly fitted out, how does it happen that the loss is $1,000 the first year, and why the small amount of $600 afterwards?—A. She might not depreciate that amount, but any man knows that if she was put on the market the depreciation would amount to $2,000. Q. In other words, she would not be considered a new vessel, and therefore she would not bring the same price as if she was just launched ? —A. No. - - Q. Would you undertake to swear that a vessel at the end of her first year would not be as good a vessel, for all practical purposes, if not better, perhaps, than when she was launched ?–A. No ; I would not SWear any such thing. Q. Would you swear that she then might be just as good 2–A. No ; there would be wear and tear of sails and rigging during that year. Q. Would there be any wear and tear of the hull if she did not meet with any extraordinary accident 3–A. I do not know that there would be any particular wear and tear of the hull if she was in good order. Q. At the end of the first year, does not the rigging get set and does not the vessel then work generally better altogether than at first 2—A. Well, I do not think so. Q. Have you any experience yourself in this respect 3–A. Well, I have had some—a little experience, but not a great deal. Q. Do you wish to have the Commission understand that the usual value of the ordinary fishing-vessels which run out of Gloucester to fish in the Bay of St. Lawrence is $8,000 %–A. Some are worth more than that. Q. I mean on an ordinary vessel; is $8,000 the ordinary price for them 3–A. I do not know that this would be the average value to-day of the vessels which come in to the Bay of St. Lawrence. Q. I speak of 100-ton vessels; do you say that this would be the av- erage Value or the average cost of such vessels 3–A. It would be the average cost of a new vessel. Q. Do you speak of their cost as it was during the war, when built, rigged, and launched, or as it is at the present time 2—A. I am speaking of the present time. Q. Do you swear that an ordinary vessel of 100 tons, such as are used in Gloucester for fishing in the bay, now costs $8,000 %–A. In the vicinity of that—yes; the cost would be $7,500 or $8,000. Q. That is at the rate of $80 a ton ?—A. Yes. Q. IS not that an immense price?—A.. I do not think so. Q. Is that an ordinary price º–A.. I think so; but I could not say.. I have not bought any vessels by the ton. Q. You see that if a 100-ton vessel costs $8,000, this would be $80 a ton ?—A. Yes. Q. Are you swearing as to the cost of vessels from your own knowl- edge or at hap-hazard 7–A. Yes. Q. Then you swear that a vessel of that description costs $80 a ton * —A. About that—yes. - Q. Did you ever build one yourself?—A. Yes. yº. Is there anything extra about the building of these vessels —A. €S. 174 F. 2770 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What is it 3–A. Sometimes there is extra cost about them, I think. t Q. But ordinarily I mean 7–A. They are all built as well as we can have them built. Q. Is such a vessel copper-fastened ?—A. Yes. Q. And coppered on the bottom 7–A. No. A. What is there extra about her ?—A. This is the copper fastening. Q. Does that cost very much 3–A. I could not say. Q. Although you undertake to say that this is the common price— $80 a ton—you cannot tell whether copper fastening increases the price materially or not ?—A. When we contract for a vessel we contract that she shall be built with copper fastenings. - Q. And you cannot tell whether copper fastening increases the price much or not ?—A. Well, our vessels are all copper-fastened. Q. You cannot tell whether copper fastening increases the price or not ?—A. I could not say how much. Q. Are you aware that vessels are now built in the States, which are classed for 10 years, and sold for $60 a ton ?—A. I do not know that. Q. Are you aware that 1,000-ton vessels are now built and classed for ten years, at that rate %–A. I am not. Q. Are you aware that this is not SO 3—A. No, I could not say that. Q. You are not familiar with this class of vessels º–A.. I am not familiar with that class of vessels. Q. When you speak of the wear and tear of these vessels, at what time do they come into the bay 3–A. In July generally. Q. And when do they go out 3—A. In the last part of October. Q. What do you do with them for the remainder of the season 2–A. They go winter fishing and shore fishing. Q. On your own coast 3—A. Yes. - Q. How long do they fish there ?—A. During the winter principally. Q. During the whole winter 7—A. Principally, yes. Q. Is not the whole or the chief part of this wear and tear sustained upon your Own coast”—A.. I do not think that it is. Q. Then you wish the Commission to understand that although your vessels are only in the Bay of St. Lawrence during the summer months and the early fall months, all the wear and tear, or a large portion of it, takes place there; and that very little takes place in the winter months On your own coast"—A. I do not mean to say any such thing. Q. What do you mean to say ? I ask you whether such wear and tear is not chiefly sustained on your own coast when fishing in winter ?—A. I suppose that more wear and tear is suffered on Our coast in winter than would be the case in the Bay of St. Lawrence in summer; this would be the case. - Q. More than that—are not heavy snow-storms, and frost, and rain, and wind then encountered on your coast, and after they have been wet, does not the frost crack the sails 7–A. During a storm in Winter the vessels generally seek a harbor. - - Q. But before they get under cover do not the wind and snow and ice affect the sails?—A.. I do not think that it would injure the sails to have Snow and ice on them. - Q. Then I understand you to say that sails which get wet and are frozen are not injured by it 2–A. I do not think they are as long as they are not used. .. ... Q. Then the sails which are wet and frozen and thawed out again in the Winter are, not injured by it, but they are injured by summer gales in the Gulf of St. Lawrence?—A. They are injured a great deal more AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2771 in the Bay of St. Lawrence by fogs and mildew. They mildew in the bay in Summer. Q. Do you swear that it is foggy in the bay in summer ?—A. Yes. Q. When is this the case?—A. I have been there during three sum- mers, and it was then foggy there for a great part of the time. Q. For how many days on the average would it be foggy 2—A. That I could not say. i - Q. How long would this be the case, taking the whole summer through 7–A. I would not pretend to say. Q. You Swear that the fog does more injury to the sails in the bay than the winter work on your own coast 3–A. I do. Q. You swear that such fog does more injury to them than the rain and the ice and the snow on your coast 3—A. Yes. Q. And the freezing and thawing out of your sails?—A. Yes. Q. And this does them more injury than the heavy gales which we all know prevail on your coast in winter?—A. But they are not out in the gales; if they are it would be different. Q. I presume that they then are out?—A. Occasionally they might then be caught out. Q. And you swear that more injury is done them by fog in the Bay of St. Lawrence than is done by all these other effects?—A. This would not be the case but on our New England coast, and more injury is done them by fog in the bay than by use on our coast. Q. What is the average duration of this fog in the bay in summer ?— A. I could not tell you. * Q. Suppose that it last for only three days during the whole season; Would you then swear that this would do the sails more harm than the . Winter fishing 2—A. No. I think there is more fog than that. Q. You swear that there is more than that in the bay ?—A. Yes; I Can Swear that there are more than 3 days’ fog in the bay in summer. Q. You swear this from your own experience º–A. Yes. Q. How long do you swear the fog continues 3–A. I would not want to Swear to any particular number of days. Q. How many days do you think that this is the case during the sea- Son º–A. I think I might have been for a week at a time in a fog there. Q. Where would you be fishing then ?—A. On Bank Orphan. r Q. Did you ever move off the Bank at all during this time 2—A. We jogged about there and fished on the Bank. We did not go off the Bank. Q. Were you fishing during the fog 2—A. Yes. Q. Were those the seasons when you did not come near the 3-mile limit”—A. Yes. Q. If you could not see for a fog, how did you happen to know that you Were not three miles from the coast 3–A. By soundings. Q. Would the soundings necessarily indicate how near the coast you were ?—A. Yes; most generally. Q. Do I understand you to say that the water off Prince Edward Island Shoals off exactly in the same proportion from one end of the coast to the other, and that all you have to do is to throw out the lead to know exactly how far from the land you are ?—A. I do not know as it does, but you can tell this pretty nearly. r Q. And when you have sworn that you did not fish within three miles of land, do you mean that the lead thus informed you as to the distance, and that you did not judge it from what you saw 2–A. This was not the case at that time. We were then off shore on the Banks. Q. You were never inshore at all ?—A. Oh, yes. 2772 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. But you were never inshore in a fog 2—A. Yes; if we were inshore in a fog we would go into a harbor. Q. And you still adhere to your statement that this week’s fog would do more harm in the inild summer weather in the bay than all the storms and snows and rains on your own coast in winter ? Did you not swear that the fog in the bay did more harm to the sails and rigging of the vessels, and cause more wear and tear than all the wear and tear of your winter work on your own coast? Did you not state that more wear and tear was caused by fog in the bay than by all the storms on your own coast 3—A. No ; I did not say that. Q. Did you not tell me so 3–A. I did not say in the winter time; I said while fishing on the New England coast. Q. I will put the question again : Do you say that there is more dam- age done the sails by Summer weather in the bay than through wear and tear in winter on your own coast 2—A. I think not. Q. Did you not tell me a little while ago that more wear and tear was sustained by your vessels in the bay in summer than on your own coast in Winter 7––A. Well? Q. Did you not say that ?—A. I did not understand you. Q. Did you not say that ? Did you say so or not ?—A. I did not put it; SO Strong as that. Q. Was that what you said or not *—A. If I did say so I meant that one week’s fog in the bay would do more harm to a suit of sails than would be done while fishing on our New England coast. *. Q. By all your winter's fishing 2—A. I did not mean winter fishing, but the same annount of time on our coast. * Q. That is to say that one week's fog in the bay would do more harm than a week of winter weather on your coast 2—A. Yes. Q. But suppose you then happened to have for a week storms of snow and rain, with frost, following each other, would this do more harm than the other alternative 7–A. Perhaps it would, but I think not. Q. You think that more damage would be done on your coast in such weather as that ?—A. I do not understand you. Q. I understood you first to say that more damage would be done in the bay to a vessel, taking the season through, than would be done on your coast through all the storms of winter; and I understood you to give as your reason for this that there might be a week’s fog there; and now you say you only meant that if a vessel was in a fog for a week in the bay this would do as much damage, as during a week of winter weather on your own coast ; will you swear that a week’s fog in the bay is as bad, or anything like it, as a week's storm of rain and snow, with frost and thaw following, one after another, on your own coast in win- ter?—A. Well, I do not know that it would. I do not think that it would. Q. I am told that there is no such thing as a week’s fog in the bay. Tell me in what year you saw that fog 2—A. I saw it in 1851 and in 1853. Q. You were there in 1851 and 1852 %–A. Yes. Q. And in 1853 &–A. Yes. Q. You only saw it in 1851 %–A. And in 1853—yes. Q. You did not see it in 1852 at all?—A. Yes; we then had a fog. Q. You saw it in 1851%—A. Yes. Q. During how long a time 2—A. I could not say. Q. For a week º–A. I think so, and more. Q. More than a week 7–A. I think so. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2773 Q. Did you see it in 1852?–A. Yes; but I would not say for how long. Q. Had you continuous fog for a week 3—A. No ; I do not mean that it lasted for a week through at a time. Q. You mean Separate foggy days during the season made up a week 3—A. They made more than that. Q. You never saw such a thing as a week’s continuous fog in the bay ?—A. I could not swear that, but still in my mind it is very clear that we had over a week's fog. Q. Continuously 7–A. I am not swearing positively to it. - Q. Will you swear that you saw anything like a week’s continuous fog in 1852 %–A. No. Q. Or in 1853%—A.. I should. Q. You that year saw a week’s continuous fog º–A. I think so. Q. Where?—A. Between Bonaventure and the island down toward the Magdalen Islands—between the island and the Magdalen Islands. Q. Out in the center of the gulf?—A. Yes; on Banks Orphan and Bradley. Q. And that lasted a week 7–A. I think so. Q. What did you do all that time 2—A. We tried for mackerel. Q. Could you tell where you were 3—A. We could tell that pretty nearly. ...” g Q. How far were you from the Magdalen Islands when the fog came on 3—A. I could not tell. I was then only a hand on the vessel. Q. Were you a sharesman Ż–A. Yes. Q. How long is it since you left for Denmark 3–A. Well, it is over thirty years ago. Q. That would be in 1847; and in 1851 you went fishing in the bay; what did you do in the mean time 2—A. I went to Sea. Q. Where ?–A. On foreign voyages. Q. I suppose that, like most emigrants, when you came to America, you did not come with money of your own 3–A. No, I do not think that I did. Q. Whatever money you made, you made in this country 3—A. Yes. Q. In 1851, when you first went fishing in the gulf, you had not made much money'—A. No ; not much, but I had a little. Q. Where did you learn your trade of sailmaking ?—A. In the United States. Q. When 3–A. I learned it during the winter in 1849, 1850, 1851, 1852, and 1853. - Q. Then you did not fish at all in winter?—A. No, but I fished in the Spring. & Q. In 1853, when you left fishing altogether, and went into business, what capital did you bring into it"—A. I had but very little. Q. Into what kind of business did you go?—A. Sailmaking and rigging. Q. And at this business you made your money 2—A. Yes. Q. Did I not understand you to say that you went into the fishing business in 1853 – A. No. Q. When did you first go into the fishing business?—A. In 1864, I think. Q. And then you put $14,000 or $15,500 of capital into the busi- ness %–A. Yes. - Q. And you had made this altogether by rigging 2—A. Yes; rigging and Sailmaking. Q. How many vessels did you send into the bay in the course of time gºt 2774 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. you were engaged in business?—A. We had four that went into the bay principally. Q. Did you go with them yourself?—A. No. Q. Did you send captains 3–A. Yes. Q. And were these captains part owners with you ?—A. Yes. Q. Do you know where those vessels fished?—A. I could not tell. Q. You do not know whether they fished inshore or not ?—A. No. Q. Did you never inquire * Did they do a good business?—A. No; they did not do much. Q. Did they get the same average catches which you obtained from 1851 to 1853?–A. Some years they did and some years they did not. Q. Were the prices of mackerel then very low 2–A. No ; they were fair. Q. Did those vessels in which you went into the bay in 1851, 1852, and 1853 make money 2—A. No. - Q. Did they lose ?—A. I do not think that they made anything. Q. Will you tell me how it was that with the full knowledge which you had of the fishing business in the bay—it being either a losing business or one in which you did not make money—you were tempted to go into the business of sending vessels to the bay; you had had personal experience that the fisheries in the bay were good for noth- ing 2—A. I had heard that a good many vessels had made money in the fishing business, and I went into it with the intention of making money, but I found that I was mistaken. + Q. You had heard that a good many vessels went into the bay and made money 3–A. Yes, some. Q. Although your experience personally was entirely against it 3– A. Yes. Q. In 1851, when you made two trips and caught 300 and 325 barrels, What was the size of the vessel ?—A. I think about 80 tons. Q. What would be a full fare ?—A. 300 or 325 barrels. Q. When you made those two trips, did you go both times back to Gloucester ?—A. Yes. Q. And you got full fares on both occasions 3–A. Yes. Y Q. In 1852, when you got 350 barrels, was it the same vessel ?—A. 62.S. Q. That was a full fare 3—A. Yes. - Q. You told me a full fare was 325 barrels 7–A. We carried some on Cleck. Q. Did you fish in 1853 %–A. Yes. Q. What was your fare then 3–A. 180 barrels. Q. The same vessel ?—A. No. - Q. What tonnage was the vessel"—A. About the same tonnage, I think. Her name was Vienna. - Q. You did not get a full fare ?—A. No. Q. On that occasion you swear you only fished on Bradley and Orphan Banks 3–A. On the first year I swear that. Q. I speak of the last year, when you caught 182 barrels 3–A. I do. Q. That was not a full fare 3—A. No. - Q. What time did you leave the bay ?—A. I think about the 1st No- vember. Q. What time did you go into the bay ?—A. In July. Q. Though you only got 180 barrels, which was not a full fare by 120 barrels, you never, during the whole time, went inshore at all?—A. We Went inshore. - - Q. Did you go inshore?—A. We tried inshore. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2775. Q. Where?—A. Coming out of Cascumpeque and Malpeque. Q. Was that within the three miles 3–A. Yes. Q. Did you try in Bay Chaleurs?—A. Yes. - Q. At Margaree?—A. Yes. Q. Did you get any mackerel?—A. There were no mackerel there that year. We tried, also, off Port Hood, and did not get any there. Q. Then there were no mackerel at all inshore that year?—A. We did not get any. Q. Were there any catches made in the bay that year?—A. Yes. Q. And notwithstanding that cutters were in the bay you went in- shore to fish?—A. We tried coming out of harbors. I don’t suppose the CutterS Saw. - Q. What did you go in for ?—A. We went in for a harbor. I said that in coming out of harbors we tried. Q. All the trying you did was when you made for harbors, and tried Coming out 3–A. Yes. Q. You really did not try anywhere at all?—A. It is so long ago I Cannot recollect. Q. Yet you recollect that in 1852 you caught 25 or 30 barrels at Mar- garee?—A. I recollect that because the cutter was coming down, and We got under way and stood out. Q. That was the reason you did not catch any more ?—A. Yes; I have no doubt about it. t Q. There was good fishing inshore there ?—A. Yes; very good. * Q. And you went out of the bay because you could not fish inshore? Did you try at Margaree in 1853?—A. There were no mackerel at Mar- garee that year. Q. Did you try at the Magdalen Islands 2—A. Yes; we caught a few there; very few. Q. In answer to Mr. Dana, you said you only fished on Bradley and Orphan Banks, and did not fishinshore?—A. That was where I caught my fish. Q. If you fished that year at Magdalen Islands, why did you not say So to Mr. Dana Ż–A. We did not catch any mackerel there. I under- stood Mr. Dana wanted to know where we took our mackerel, and I said at Banks Bradley and Orphan. We tried toward Magdalen Islands and at Margaree and Prince Edward Island. • Q. You mean you did try at Magdalen Islands, but did not catch any ?—A. Yes. Q. How long did you stay at Magdalen Islands 2—A. We might have been there one or two days. Q. What time of the year was it 3–A. In September, I think. Q. Why did you go away from there ?—A. It is no use to stay there if no mackerel are there. Q. Is it stormy round Magdalen Islands at all ?—A. Yes. Q. Do you consider it an unsafe place to fish late in the season 3–A. Yes. Q. Is it usually so considered among fishermen 3–A.. I believe so. Q. Is it one of the most dangerous places in the bay ?—A. I don’t consider it half so dangerous as at Prince Edward Island. Q. What part of Prince Edward Island is twice as dangerous as Magdalen Islands?—A. In the bend of the island. - Q. Are there no harbors there?—A. Yes; there are harbors, but they are hard harbors to get into. Q. Have you been there of late years to see if there are any harbors of refuge there ?—A.. I have not. 2776 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Are there not many more vessels lost at Magdalen Islands than at Prince Edward Island 3–A. I think not. Q. That is your idea 7–A. Of late years there may have been. In former years more were lost at Prince Edward Island. Q. Do you mean to say that, excepting the year of the great Ameri- can gale %–A. I take that in. Q. At what time of the year did that occur 7—A. I do not know whether in September or October. In October, I think. Q. That is the season when few or no vessels are at Magdalen Islands"—A. Yes. Q. They would leave Magdalen Islands and go fishing at Prince Ed- Ward Island?—A. I don’t know. Q. Don’t they fish around Prince Edward much later in the season than around Magdalen Islands 2—A. Not at the bend of the island. Around East Point they do. Q. Were not a number of the vessels lost at East Point %—A. Some were lost there, I think. Q. Then you swear that you believe Magdalen Islands to be a safer place than Prince Edward Island 4–A. I would rather fish there. There are more chances for a vessel to get out. Q. Why?—A. There is a chance to go around the islands. Q. Is there not a chance to go around Prince Edward Island at the Irortheast or north end ?–A. If you are near either end there is the Same; if you are not near one of the ends you have not much chance in a Storm. Q. Cannot you go into the harbors 3–A. Suppose a vessel draws 12 or 14 feet, she cannot go over the bars. - Q. If the bar has less depth of water, of course she cannot. Do you say the harbors have less than that ?—A. They had at that time; I don’t know what they are now. j Q. In answer to Mr. Dana, you stated that you believe the inshore fishery is of no practical value to the United States?—A. I should not consider it so. - - Q. And did you so consider it in 1851, 1852, and 1853?–A. Yes. Q. Was that the general opinion?—A.. I think that is the general opinion of everybody. Q. Amongst fishermen in 1851, 1852, and 1853, and ever since 2—A. Yes; I think so. [. Q. Did you ever hear any one among fishermen say to the contrary 2– ...A.. I don’t know I ever heard anybody. - Q. How do you account for their making such endeavors to get the right to fish inshore?—A. I did not know they made any endeavors. Q. In your judgment they are good for nothing?—A. I would not give One cent for the whole of them. Q. And you think that is the opinion of all the fishermen 3–A. I could not Say what their opinion is. It is so, as far as I know. Q. And as far as you know is it the opinion of fish merchants?—A. I could not say. - - - Q. You Were in that business yourself?—A. I am not in business IłOW. - Q. You have stated that in your opinion the inshore fisheries are not Worth one cent, and that as far as you know that is the opinion of the fishermen º–A. Yes. Q. IS that the opinion of the fish merchants as well ?—A. I think so. Q. I suppose that is the opinion in Gloucester, Boston, and all along the coast of Massachusetts?—A. I think so, AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2777 Q. And if any person, either a United States fisherman or otherwise, makes any trouble about getting the right to fish within the three miles for their vessels, you think he is foolish 3–A. I think so. I think they will be fools to pay anything for it. Q. If they can get the fishing without paying for it, they will not be fools?—A. There are very few fish inshore anyway. Q. Even now that is so 7–A. I don’t know. I have not been there lately. I could not say. Q. You don’t know anything about it practically since 1853?–A. Not practically. - - Q. You seriously swear you would not give one cent for the inshore fisheries 3–A. At that time I would not. Q. That is in 1854. Have you heard that they have since been very much better?—A. I have not. - Q. Would you rather have one cent in your pocket than the grant of all these fisheries 3–A. I think I should. By Mr. Dana : Q. I suppose you think, in that case, you would have to carry them about 3–A. Yes. Q. If you had a large number of vessels and you intended to send them to the bay to fish, would you send them if you had to pay for the right of inshore fishing 2—A. No ; I would not. Q. And the result of your experience is that it would not pay to send them into the bay to fish 7–A. No ; as far as my experience goes. Q. About sails. Are there not great efforts made to procure Some- thing to prevent the effect of fog and mildew on sails 3–A. Yes. Q. It is considered a very serious evil?—A. Yes. Q. More so than ordinary storm and rain —A. Yes. Q. I suppose seafaring-men, when they get into harbor, after a storm of Wind and rain, dry the sails?—A. Yes. Q. A few days of rain followed by sunshine would not hurt a vessel SO much as long-continued dampness %–A. No. No. 67. JAMES W. PATTILLO, of North Stoughton, Mass., retired fisherman, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Trescot: 1 Question. How old are you ?—Answer. 71 years on 29th September la St. Q. You have been a fisherman in your day ?—A. Yes. Q. ºd have fished a good deal 2–A. All the way along from 1834 to 1868. Q. Were you fishing all that time?—A. The best part of it; some part of the time I was not. Q. What were you doing when you were not fishing?—A. I was agent two years for the insurance company. Q. Whereabouts?—A. Down at Cape Breton Island, at Port Hood, looking out for American vessels. - Q. From 1834 to 1868, how often were you skipper ?—A. I was skip- per in 1838. % How many years?—A. 1839, 1840, and all the way along pretty Inll Ch; * * 2778 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. All the while from 1840 to 1868?–A. Yes, all the time I was mas- ter except two years, when I did not go to the bay. Q. During that period of time have you been in the bay a good deal? —A. Some years I went to the bay two trips, some years but one trip, and some years not at all. Q. Have you done any fishing on the American coast as well as in the bay ?—A. I have. Q. What sort of proportion does the fishing on the American coast bear to the fishing in the bay? Did you fish most on your coast or most in the bay?—A.. I fished more in the bay than on the coast, although I have done fully better on our own shores in seasons than I ever have in the bay. Q. You say you went fishing first in 1834. Where did you go?—A. I did not go into North Bay in 1834. I fished on our own shores. Q. When was the first year you went into the bay ?—A. In 1836, in the Good Hope. - Q. When was the last year you were in the gulf?—A. 1868. , Q. Did you find any difference in the fishing in 1868 from what it was in 1836, and, if so, what was the difference %—A. In 1836 we did but little. We had a large vessel, Good Hope, with 13 or 14 men, and got 65 barrels. We proceeded there some time in July, and arrived home at the latter part of September. Q. How often after that did you go into the gulf? What is the total number of consecutive years you have been in the bay?—A. I have been there 21 trips. - Q. You have then got a pretty good knowledge of what the gulf fish- ing has been from 1836 to 1868. How does the gulf fishing compare now with what it was when you first went there 2–A.. I have not been there since 1868, and of what has been done since I have little knowl- edge except what I have read. Q. From 1836 to 1868, has there been a great change in the bay fish- ing, or was it pretty much the same 2—A. In the gulf it used to vary. Some years there would be pretty good fishing, and other years it would be pretty slim. Q. Where was your general fishing-place in the gulf 3–A. On Banks Orphan and Bradley, and at Magdalen Islands. At Magdalen Islands I fished mostly always, and I found better fishing 15 or 20 miles from the land, on the north side of the Magdalens, and round Bird Rocks, than anywhere else. I have caught some mackerel along at Point Mis- Cou, in the range of North Cape, Prince Edward Island; but one-half of the mackerel we got at Magdalen Islands and round Banks Bradley and Orphan. Q. During these 21 years, how much fishing did you do within three miles of the land 7–A. To the best of my judgment, I will give you the facts. I had the day and date for all the items, but in 1863 we had a fire, and it was burned up, and therefore I will give you them the best I can from memory. I never thought anything about it till a week ago, when I overhauled my memory, and I can give it to you. The first year, in the Good Hope, we got 65 barrels of mackerel; none were caught within the limits. I think we caught about 35 barrels in one day, about 8 or 10 miles to the northward of Magdalen Islands. Mr. THOMSON called attention to a memorandum from which witness Was reading. WITNESS said the paper was a memorandum he had made out of the years he had been in North Bay and where he caught the mackerel. AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2779 Mr. THOMSON. If your books were lost and your memory does not serve you, how did you make up the paper?—A. From my memory. Q. Why did you make up the paper ?—A. I made it up to be accurate, and so that if I was asked questions, I might not mix up voyages. Mr. THOMSON. Then I understand you to state that you sat down and made up that paper from your recollection ?—A. Yes. Examination resumed. WITNESS. The next mackerel we got was somewhere about 40 wash- barrels, about twenty miles broad off St. Peter's. That was all the mackerel we got to make up 65 barrels. Those were 65 sea-barrels, which we carried to Cape Ann. The second year, 1837, I was in the Mount Vernon, and we caught 300 barrels of mackerel. We caught 200 barrels broad off to an anchor within half a mile of the land; and 100 barrels we caught 10, 15, or 20 miles from the land. Mr. TRESCOT. Where did you catch them 2–A. At Margaree Island or Sea Cove Island. It was on 13th October, I remember it well, and we filled up. In 1838 I was master of the same Good Hope, and we got 270 barrels. I think, according to the best of my judgment, we got 50 barrels of them within three miles of the land, but I think, to the best of my judgment, the rest were taken in our own waters, 5, 10, 15 or 20 miles from the land. In 1839 I was in the Tiger, and got 75 barrels. We caught them all off shore, that is, without the three-mile limit. In 1840 I was not in the bay; I fell from the mast-head and broke my thigh. In 1841. I was in the bay twice in the Abigail. The first trip we got 250 barrels on Banks Bradley and Orphan. The second trip we got 75 barrels up at the bend of the island, making 325 barrels for the season. In 1842, 1843, and 1844, I was fishing on our shores in the Hosea Blue. In 1845 and 1846 I fished on our shores. In 1848 I fished on our shores in the Alexander. In 1849 I was at home. In 1850 L was in the Alex- ander on our shores. In 1851 I was in the bay in the Alexander, and made two trips; that was the year of the gale. On the first trip, I caught, between Point Miscou and North Cape, 314 barrels. I landed them at Arichat, with a member of the house named Martel, and he advanced me the money to fit out the second time. The next trip I got 214 barrels after the gale. To the best of my judgment I got from 75 to 100 barrels within the limits. We got them in two or three days after the gale. Some of them made out we were within the limits, so I went home ; I thought it was no use to continue. Captain Derby was kind of chasing us, so I went home. I had to come to Arichat and get my 314 barrels. In 1852 I caught 335 barrels, and I caught them from the north part of Anticosti up to Seven Islands, right in the gulf, 15 or 20 miles from land. We were about in the range off from the northwest part of Anticosti to Seven Islands, and up the gulf. That was in the Alexander. In 1853 I had the schooner EHighland Lass, and got 400 barrels. I caught them between Point Miscou, say 10 or 15 miles off Miscou, and up the west shore, 8 or 10 miles along, at Escuminac. I caught half of them to an anchor. It was the year when the vessel was new. Those are all sea-barrels. The next year, 1854, I got 300 barrels. In 1855 I had Christie Campbell, a new vessel. The EIighland Lass was in the bay. A man named Samuel Chambers was in her; I know he did not do a great deal, but I don’t know what he got. On the first trip I got 250 barrels on Banks Bradley and Orphan ; on the second trip I caught 200 barrels at Magdalen Islands. In 1856 I got 285 barrels. I caught the princi- pal part of them on Fisherman's Bank, between Cape George and George- town. I got about 100 barrels there at the last of the month; it wound 2780 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. up my fare, on, I think, 19th October. In 1847 I was in the gulf again and got 330 barrels. I caught them at Magdalen Islands, off Blackland, and some down round the Bird Rocks. We caught them round Bird Rocks to an anchor, and the balance off Blackland, on the north side of the Magdalens. In 1858 I was agent for the insurance company. In 1859 I was at home. I had a man to go in her, so I staid at home. In 1860 I was again agent for the insurance company, looking after Ameri- can vessels. In 1861 I went to the gold diggings, down at Wine Har- bor, and bought an old claim for $60; but I did not get much gold. In 1862 I was in the Rose Skerrit, and got two trips of mackerel. The first trip of 350 barrels I got off Blackland, at Magdalen Islands; the second trip I got 400 barrels, making 750 barrels in short of three months, and we went home and landed them. We caught the first trip in twelve days, and the second we took in twenty days. We got our trips all round the Magdalens, and perhaps half-way from Entry Island to East Point. Q. Did you get any within the three miles 3–A. Not one of them. In 1863 I went in Oliver Cromwell and got 940 barrels. I made but one trip. I sent home 560 barrels, I think. I could not pretend to say to a barrel. I think I landed the first trip, 330 barrels, at Maguire's in the Gut, and the next trip we landed, making 560 barrels. That is to the best of my memory. Before we came home we made it up to 950 barrels. Q. Where did you catch those ?—A. I caught half of the first trip be- tween Entry Island and Cheticamp, about half way. We had Entry Island in sight, 25 miles off, and sometimes not quite so far. It is known to be a good fishing ground, and there we got one-half of our mackerel on the first trip. Of the rest of the mackerel, we caught some within the limits; I don’t know just how many. I could not pretend to say on my oath, but we got some. We got them in Georges Bay, between Cape George and Cape Patrick, in Antigonish Bay. Of these 940 barrels, we probably got 100 barrels within the limits; I think that is a large esti- mate of what we got there. I think it would be honest and fair, as be- tween man and man, to say 100 barrels, which would be as much as We got inshore, to the best of my judgment. In 1864 I went in the Schooner Scotland. She was 125 tons. We got 500 barrels that trip. We got half of them on Banks Bradley and Orphan ; some up off Point Miscou. The next year, 1865, I went two trips in her. The first trip I got 370 barrels; we got all of them on Banks Bradley and Orphan; and on the second trip when we caught them, the east point of the island was West- southwest of us 15 or 20 miles. We got a deck of mackerel there acci- dentally. We were becalmed and hove to and got 100 or 120 wash-barrels there. We got half of the trip there, and we got the rest of that trip between East Point and Port Hood. In 1866 I was at home; I went to the Banks. In 1867 I was one trip in the Scotland and got about 400 barrels. I cannot tell you exactly, but I think not one barrel was taken inshore. We caught them between Prince Edward Island and Point Miscou. In 1868 I caught 450 barrels. I got them in the bay and caught 350 barrels on our own shore before I started. I made two trips on the Georges before I went to the bay. I went out and was gone ten days and got 130 barrels; I went again and got 220 barrels, making 350 barrels in, I guess, not over 25 or 28 days, and I got the balance of the fall trip making 450, and also making 750 barrels for that year. Q. Where did you get the 450 barrels?—A. I got half of them between Entry Island and Prince Edward Island, and some to the north of North Cape. Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2781 THURSDAY, October 18, 1877. The Conference met. The examination of JAMES W. PATTILLO was resumed. By Mr. Trescot: § - Question. I see you are stated to belong to North Stoughton; were you born there?—Answer. No; I was born in Chester, Lunenburg County, Nova Scotia, September 29, 1806. --- Q. Without giving precise details of your catches during your 21 years of experience in the bay as a fisherman, will you tell me what proportion of the fish you caught during this period was taken within the 3-mile limit?—A. Possibly 10 per cent.—10 barrels out of 100; and I think that would be a large proportion, because during the 21 seasons I was in the bay the most mackerel I ever so caught was in my Second year. Q. Being a fisherman of that experience, what sort of advantage do you think it is to have the right to fish within the 3-mile limit in British waters; do you attach much importance to it 2–A. Well, if I had to go in the bay J should not calculate that inshore fishing was worth any- thing at all. I would only go inshore to make harbors and dress fish. I would not give a snap of my finger for the inshore fisheries. When licenses cost 50 cents a ton I would not pay it. I would rather fish in my Own Waters, because I could do better there. Q. You never took a license out 7–A. I never did. I was for three years in the bay when they were issued, but I would not take one out. I did not want them. Q. You were then master of your own vessel ?—A. Yes; I owned the Vessel and was master. Q. And you ran the risk 7–A. I fished in my own waters, 3, 4, 5, 10 and 20 miles off land, and I always did better there than inshore. I Would not give a cent for the inshore fisheries. All I would go inshore for would be to make a harbor. sº- Q. You never had any trouble with the cutters?—A. No ; save once When they chased me. Q. But that was no trouble %–A. O, no; it was only for doing a kind aCt. Q. Besides having fished for 21 years in the bay, did you fish much On Our own coast 3–A. I did. - Q. How does the fishing on our coast compare with the fishing in the bay ?—A. I have myself always done better on our own shore, with the exception of one year, than I ever did in North Bay. Q. During how many years did you fish on our shore?—A. I think I fished there 8 seasons, or somewhere about that ; it was perhaps a little more, but I know I fished there 8 years. f Q. If you found the fishing on our shore so much better than the fish- ing in the bay, why did you go to the bay ?—A. Well, there was just One principle on which we used mostly to go to the bay; the fact is that when we shipped a crew at Cape Cod, after we had been off for a fort- night or 3 weeks on our shore, men would leave the vessel; but when We got a crew and came to North Bay, they had to stay on board; there was then no back door to crawl out of. This was one of the chief reasons for coming to the bay, as we then had no trouble in the shipping of hands, good, bad, or indifferent; but when we were down on our shore, men Would go off and we would have to secure new hands. Men Would think they might do better, and they would go where the high line was; and we were then under the necessity of supplying their places. Another thing was, that by going to the bay, we got clear of the fog. On our 2782 Award of THE FISHERY commission. coast there is a great deal of fog, but when we reach North Bay, we get Clear of it. Q. You say that in the gulf your fishing was done on the Banks and toward the Magdalen Islands 2—A. Yes; we caught the heft of our mackerel invariably around the Magdalen Islands. Q. As a fishing ground, taking it all in all, are the Magdalen Islands much worse than Prince Edward Island 2–A. They are better than Prince Edward Island. Q. You did not fish much about Prince Edward Island 7—A. I never did a great deal. I tried around there, but I never caught many fish there. Q. You are sure that you never took a license out 7–A. Yes; I am Sure that I never took a license out. I never paid a red cent for a license. By Mr. Thomson : Q. You never took out a license 2–A. No. Q. Where were you in 1866%—A. At home. Q. Do you know of a vessel belonging to Gloucester called the Scot- land 3–A. Yes. Q. Do you own her ?–A. Yes. - Q. Was she in the bay in 1866%—A. I do not recollect whether she WaS OF DOt. Q. How happens it, since you have given most extraordinary evi- dence of having a good memory, recollecting not only what you did 30 years ago, but the very days of the month when events occurred, that you do not remember where the Scotland was in 1866, and what she was then doing %–A. I think that Captain Bartlett went in her that year to the Banks, fresh halibuting—down at St. Peter's Bank. Q. And she did not go to the bay at all that year 7—A. I think not. Q. Can you swear positively that she did not ?—A. No ; I cannot ; but to the best of my recollection she did not go to the bay that year. Q. Did any of your vessels, when you were not in them, take out licenses 3–A. Not that I know of. Q. Can you swear that the Scotland did not take out a license in 1866, and did not fish in the Bay in 1866%—A. Well, she might have then been in the bay; I was not in her. I never paid for a license to my knowledge in my life. - Q. I presume that the captain would not pay for a license out of his own pocket 2—A. Well, I cannot recollect paying for one. I know that I did not do so when I was in her myself. Y Q. How happens it, if your memory is so good, that you cannot remember this 2 You surprised me by stating as far back as 30 years ago, not only what you did during a particular year, but also what you did on the 18th and 19th of October 2—A. The 18th and 19th of Octo- ber 3 Q. I think so.-A. No ; but I recollect catching mackerel in the Mount Vernon, on the 11th, 12th and 13th of October, when we took 200 barrels. I recollect that as well as if it had only happened yesterday. My memory serves me better concerning events which happened Some 40 years ago, than for those that have occurred somewhat recently. Q. That was in 1837?–A. Yes. Q. Forty years ago 3–A. Yes. Q. You not only recollect what you then did, but also the very days of the month in this regard 3–A. That is true. I do so recollect it. Q. I do not mean to say that your memory is not quite accurate; but it surprises me to find that with such an exceedingly retentive AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2.783 memory, you fail to remember where the Scotland went in 1866%—A. Well, I can recollect events that happened 40 and 50 years ago better than anything which happened yesterday. I had everything that occurred as I went along, until I was burned out; until then I had manuscripts referring to all my voyages and cruises, and everything else that I did ; and in this statement I have given the facts just as they occurred, as well as my memory serves me. I give you the truth on both sides just as faithfully as I would if I were to die this very minute. I want to give you the exact truth. Q. I don’t dispute that.—A. That is it. Q. I am not charging you with making any willful mistake; but I wish to see whether you are in error.—A. I may be in error. Q. You say that all the memoranda which you kept concerning your Voyages have been lost; why did you keep such written memoranda. ?— A. I always kept them, in order to know what I did, whereabouts I was, and how much money I made, as I most always owned the whole of all the vessels I had, though I did not own the whole of the Scotland. I never kept such account further than concerned what expenses were paid, and what balance belonged to me; and in this way I knew how much I made, after I had completed my voyage and paid all charges; then if I made $1,000, I thus knew that I made it such a year; and if I made $2,000, I put that down for such or such a year, clear of living and expenses. Sometimes it was more, and sometimes it was less; but such as it was, I made a memorandum of it, to which I could refer and know just exactly where I stood. I never went into debt, and I always paid as I went. Q. After you made such memoranda, you would have no occasion to refer to them again 3—A. No ; but I always could do so if any questions arose rendering it desirable. Q. Had you occasion to refer back to them ; nothing occurred to make this necessary until this occasion arose 3—A. No. Q. When did you last read them 3–A.. I have not read any paper Concerning my voyages since I knocked off fishing, and my last year's fishing was in 1868. I have not thought of doing so. Q. I presume that when you read the record of 1868, or of 1867, you would not have gone back to the extent of 30 years previously—to 1837, or 1838% Nothing had then happened to call your attention to such matters ?—A. No ; nothing has occurred in the fishing business in which I have been in any way or shape interested, since I left off fish. ing; and 1868 was my last year. Q. In 1868, when you made your last memorandum on the subject of your fishing voyages, you had no occasion to turn over and read your manuscripts as far back as 1837 ?—A. Well, then I had no manuscripts to refer to. - * Q. Did you make memoranda concerning what you did in 1868?—A. After my manuscripts were burned up, I never made any such memo- randa at all. - Q. When were they burned up 2—A. In 1863 or 1864, I think. Q. Then you did not make any such memoranda afterward 2–A. No. Q. I suppose you made memoranda respecting what you did in 1863, or 1862?–A. They were burned up. Q. Did you do so in 1862?—A. I think so. - Q. When you had done so, did you then have occasion to refer back to previous entries as far back as 1837?—A. No. Q. After you had made an entry for any particular year, nothing ever occurred to call your attention back to those entries until after the books 2784 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. which contained them were burned ?–A. No ; I never referred to them, but often when we got together we would talk over what we had done Such and such a year; we would talk over at the fireside what we had done in a vessel—say in 1836, 1837, or 1838—telling how many mackerel We got and how much money we made, and all that, in common talk. We would refer to these matters time and time again, telling who was high-line, and all what happened. We used to talk over these subjects in that way. t Q. Although you did talk over what you did in these different years, you never referred to this memorandum-book to verify your state- ments 3–A. No. * Q. Then it comes to this, that although you had a memorandum- book, you never referred to it at all to assist your memory 2—A. No ; not a bit. Q. With this extraordinary memory, the accuracy of which I do not dispute—recollecting not only what you did 40 years ago but the very days of the month on which certain events happened, yet you cannot tell me whether in 1866, 11 years ago, your vessel, the Scotland, went into the bay to fish or not º–A. Well, she went halibuting that year. Q. But she did not go into the bay ?—A. No ; she went to St. Peter's Bank and the Western Bank. ¥ *. Q. But that is not the Gulf of St. Lawrence %–A. Well, she might have gone up above Seven Islands, where a good many halibut used to be got. - Q. That lies south of the coast of Labrador and north of the island of Anticosti ?—A. Yes. Q. Did she go there to catch balibut?—A. She might have done so; I was not in her. She was in charge of Captain Bartlett at the time. Q. Your captain would surely tell you where he had been and where he had caught his fish 2 This would be your first question ?—A. As long as he had halibut that was the chief thing I looked after. Q. I do not think you would be content with merely knowing that ? You would ask him where he had been and where he had caught his fish 3–A. Sometimes I might do SO and sometimes I might not. Q. Did you, in point of fact, ask and discover from him where he had been and what he had caught that year?—A. I could not answer that question ; I could not say whether I did so or not; I might possibly have done so, and I might not. - Q. Then I am right in stating that, notwithstanding your good mem- ory, you do not recollect whether your vessel, the Scotland, went in 1866 into the gulf or not ?—A. Well, I am pretty positive in saying that she did not go there that year mackereling. Q. Did she go there at all, for halibut or any other fish 7–A. Not that I know of; that is not within my recollection. Q. You have no recollection of Captain Bartlett llaving taken out a license in the bay that year?—A. No. Q. Do you recollect what the license-fee was that year 3–A. It might have been $1 for all I know, and it might have been 50 cents. Q. What was the tonnage of the Scotland 3–A. 123, carpenter's measurement, and I think one hundred and something new tonnage. I think that I paid for 125 or 130 tons, when I bought her. Q. Did they measure the tonnage by carpenter's measurement in levying fees?—A. That I cannot tell. Q. The fee would be at least $50, if they charged 50 cents per ton, or $120 if $1 a ton was charged.—A. Yes. - Q. That sum would not be paid by the captain 3–A. I suppose that AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2785 it would come out of the common stock—the whole stock; one-half would be paid by the crew, and one-half by the owner. I suppose so— I do not know ; but that is my impression. © Q. In the report concerning the issue of fishing licenses, for fishing inshore in Canadian waters, it is stated that in 1866 a license was taken out by the Scotland, J. W. Pattils, of Gloucester, Mass.?—A. There is no person of that name. James W. Pattillo is my name. Q. The name entered here is J. W. Pattils—probably a misprint—and the tonnage of the Scotland is given as 78; that, I suppose, Would be ordinary tonnage, not carpenter’s measurement º–A. I. Suppose SO. Q. How many men did she carry 3–A. Sometimes 14 and some- times 15. - - Q. She is represented here as having 16 men, and as having paid 50 cents per ton for the license, amounting in all to $38.50. There was no other Scotland, J. W. Pattils, of Gloucester, Mass.; and yet you see that she did take out a license that year 7—A. How is that name spelled 3 Q. Pattils.-A. My name is spelled Pattillo. - Q. There is no person that spells his name Pattils, that you are aware of, in Gloucester'?—A. No. Q. And your initials are J. W.?—A. Yes. Q. Can you undertake to say that this entry is wrong, and that such a license was never. taken out 7–A. Well, I would not pretend to say that statement is wrong; but I have no recollection of this having been the case. * - Q. At all events, if the captain took it in your absence, and without your knowledge, he had more respect for the inshore fisheries than you have now, apparently 7–A. Well, I never paid a cent for a license to my knowledge, though I might have paid for that, but I do not recollect of baving done so. I never considered inshore fishing in the bay worth –50 cents, nor yet would I pay 25 cents for the privilege. Q. In answer to Mr. Trescot, you stated you thought that the fishing off the American coast was better than the fishing around Prince Edward Island and in the bay ?—A. I think so. y Q. You spoke of the American coast as “our shore,” and in the same breath you said you were born in Nova Scotia 3—A. I have been natu- ralized; and I now call that our shore. I have become a citizen of the United States. Q. When were you naturalized ?–A. In 1836, I think; I have the papers to show. Q. The oath you have thus taken is not merely, I believe, an oath of allegiance as a citizen of the United States, but also an oath of abroga- tion of allegiance to Queen Victoria and the sovereigns of Great Brit- ain 3–A. I think that when I was sworn, which was in open court, I swore to be true to the United States of America, and I also swore alle- giance against Great Britain and Ireland and all Her Majesty's domin- IOI) S. & 43 Q. I thought so.-A. And I have tried to be loyal to the United States ever since. - - Q. You came from Nova Scotia, and you say you swore allegiance against Nova Scotia when you took this oath 3–A. Well, I wanted to have the right and privilege of any citizen, and I could not secure that Without going through this preliminary. - Q. And after that you tried to keep your oath, and you have been heart and soul an American citizen ever since %–A. Yes; certainly. Q. And you regard this question, which is now to be determined by 175 E. 2786 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. these Commissioners, from an American stand-point?—A. Yes; of course I do. Q. And I, suppose you take quite an interest in seeing the Commis- Sioners award nothing, or as little as possible, against the United States?—A. Well, I took no thought of it—good, bad, or indifferent— until I was invited to come down here ; and that was a week ago yester- day. I have tried to overhaul my memory the best I could, and I have done the best I could. If anybody could could do it any better, I would like to have him try it. I have done the best I could, and if I have done wrong, I have not intended it. I would not lie for the Commission, whether they give fifteen millions or not. * Q. Do not misunderstand me. I am not charging you with lying or anything of that kind.—A. No ; I would not do it. Q. Tell me why, having this memory, and considering the fact that your memoranda were destroyed, you wrote down memoranda on that paper ?—A. I could tell all the things just as they came along, but I wanted to be accurate, and I did not know but they might begin at one end or the other, and I wanted it to refer to. Q. You have been examined before you came here ?—A, I have merely talked it. Over. Q. You had no idea of Mr. Trescot puzzling you ?—A. He asked me a word or two; but I did not then refer to any particular year—good, bad, or indifferent. Q. You had no idea of his entrapping you ?––A. Well, I did not know %ut what you might catch me. Q. You have stated you do not think that the inshore fisheries in the gulf are worth anything at all 3–A. No ; I do not. Q. And you say that you never took out a license, but I see that One of your vessels took out a license; hence, her captain entertained a dif- ferent opinion from yourself in this regard ; are you really serious in . saying that they are worth nothing at all 7–A. No ; they are not. The fish of the sea, on any shore, are not worth anything. Q. Then your idea is that these inshore fisheries ought not to be paid for by the United States, because the fish in the sea are nobody’s fish until they are caught?—A. That is it ; I never thought that the fish- eries inshore were worth anything. Q. For this reason, because they are not caught 2—A. Well, that is one reason for it. $ Q. You did catch fish inshore on several occasions; you took more than half one trip—100 barrels or upwards inshore ?—A. I was then a hand, and was along with William Forbes in the Mount Vernon ; that was a very poor year when very few mackerel were taken in the whole bay. Q. Even so, but you then caught one-half of your trip inshore ?—A. We took two-thirds of it, 200 barrels. Q. Inshore?—A.Yes; within half a mile of the island. That was my second year fishing. * Q. The privilege of fishing inshore was worth something that year?— A. We made a little out of it that time. - Q. If you could do that again, the inshore fishing would be Worth something 2—A. I have tried it a number of times, but I could never do anything of any account inshore. Q. O, yes, you did afterward to some extent 2–A. Well, while I was in the Oliver Cromwell I caught 940 barrels, and I think about 100 bar- rels of these were taken inshore. I did not go home with my first catch that year, but I sent fish home twice. I shipped from Canso 330 bar- ^. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2787 rels, I think, the first time, and 230 barrels, or thereabouts, the second time, and the rest I carried home. Q. Did you pack them out in Canso 2–A. No ; I only landed them there. - Q. Why?—A. I landed them because this was during the war, and the men were afraid of being drafted, and if I had gone home, I would have had to hire men for the purpose at Canso. Cruisers were burning everything up, and so I got a letter of marque and got all prepared. I obtained a license from the Secretary of War over at Charlestown, and I fitted out my vessel with a six-pounder and shot and cutlasses, and everything necessary for us to fight our way; and I landed the fish and made only one trip that season, because the men were afraid to return lest they should be drafted. Q. You fitted out not against British but Southern cruisers, and your men were afraid of being drafted into the northern army 2—A. I fitted out against any one who should trouble me anyhow ; and I was deter- mined, if necessary, to fight my way. If that bark had come across me, I would have done my best to take her. Q. Which bark 3–A. The one that burned the vessels about George’s |Bank. Q. The Alabama 3–A. No ; but an old bark—the Tacony. Q. She was a Southern cruiser ?—A.. I do not know that, but I meant to have taken her if I could. The fact is, I was all cut and dried for her. The people of Halifax all came down to look at my vessel. I had a six-pounder on board, and 24 rounds of round shot, and 24 rounds of grape, and bags of powder, and everything else required ; while each man had a cutlass and a revolver. I paid $800 for that outfit. Q. When was this 3–A. It was in 1863. Q. Your men were afraid of going back to your coast lest they should be drafted into the Northern army 2—A. Yes. Q. And you were afraid of being captured by this Southern cruiser ?— A. I was not afraid, not a bit. Q. Well, lest you should be so captured, you armed yourself to show fight 3—A. Yes, I did. Q. You had no other object ; you did not intend to fight any vessels except Southern cruisers ?—A. No, of course not. I intended to go along peaceably if I was left alone. * Q. You told Mr. Trescot that, though the fisheries on your coast are better than those in the gulf, you preferred to go to the gulf in order to keep your crews together ?—A. That is so. Q. Was not that a great convenience to you ?—A. Yes; and besides we thus got clear of the fogs which prevail a great deal on our coast during the summer. After we get through Canso, into North Bay, we meet with little fog. Q. Have you any fog on your coast in Winter ?—A. Yes, sometimes; but not very often. Q. It is a stormy place to fish in winter, on your coast 2—A. Some- times it is and sometimes it is not. " - Q. But taking the season through, it is a Stormy coast 3–A. All coasts are stormy in winter; but our coast is not then so stormy as the coast around the British Provinces and in the gulf. Q. A large portion of the gulf freezes up in winter ?–A. Yes; but I have been in the gulf till near Christmas for produce on the north side of Prince Edward Island. Q. Without getting frozen up 7–A. I did not get frozen up. I think I left Malpeque on the 17th of November. 2788 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. …” Q. Is not the weather on your coast in winter very hard on the rig- ging of vessels—on the sails, and so on ?—A. Yes. Q. It is a good deal harder on them than is summer or fall weather in the bay, before the stormy season sets in 2—A. Certainly; more wear and tear is suffered in this regard in winter than in summer on any coast. Q. You admit, then, that if it was not for the bay fishing in your time, you could not have kept the crews together, as you could not do so on your own coast”—A. Well, that was one reason why I went to the bay; when We lost a man on our shore we could get another, but this occa- Sioned loss of time. g Q. You could not keep your crews there?—A. When we would lose one we could find another to replace him, but this caused loss of time. Q. And time is money 3–A. Of course. Q. Therefore you made more money by taking your crews to the gulf, than you could have made if you had fished on your shore, losing and replacing men the While 3—A.. I suppose that sometimes we would thus make more money and sometimes we would not; we had to run the risk of it. - ‘A * Q. You saved yourself inconvenience and came to the gulf?—A. I used to go there some seasons, when I had a mind to do so. Q. Did you really send your vessels or come to the gulf knowing that you could thus make more money than if you fished on your own coast 2 —A. I never sent a vessel into North Bay; I let the skipper do as he wished in this respect. He was his own guide, and he could go to the gulf if he liked, or fish on our shore, according to his preference; he was master of the vessel, and I fitted her out. Q. Is that the rule of that particular trade, to allow the master to go and fish where he pleases?—A. As a general thing, yes. Q. Without the owner controlling him at all ?—A. Well, I made it a rule, at any rate, to do so. When I went for other people I went just where I had a mind to. I went just where I thought I could do best. Q. And the owner never attempted to control you in this regard 3– A. No ; if he had, I would have left his vessel. Q. Was your practice in this respect the usual practice of other skip- pers?—A.. I presume so, but I do not know that it was ; I know, how- ever, that I did so myself. - Q.. Have the skippers an interest in the vessels?—A. Most of the skippers of Cape Ann, for the last few years, have been part owners to the extent of + or #, or something like that, and the owner of the vessel will think that the captain would go where the most money is to be made, or try to do So, and So the skippers are allowed to be the judges in this relation. Q. Therefore it is to be presumed that the captains who have gone to the gulf have done so because they could make more money by fish- ing there than by fishing on your coast 2—A. Certainly ; that is the reason why I went to the United States—because I could do better there than here. Q. You will admit, at all events, that coming to the bay is a conven- ience with respect to keeping the crews together? The gulf fishery is an important fishery to the Americans?—A. It was so for a number of years, but this is not the case at the present time, from what I have learned. Q. You do not pretend to know anything about this matter since 1868? —A. I know the result of the fisheries from the figures in the papers, and I know what is going on at Cape Ann. f . AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2789 Q. But figures sometimes do not stand investigation ?–A. Figures, they say, always tell the truth; “figures cannot lie.” Q. By coming to the bay you also avoidéd the fogs in summer on your coast 3–A. Yes. Q. I believe that either there is no fog at all or very little fog in the Bay of St. Lawrence during the summer ?—A. There is then very little of it. Q. You have been there from 1837?—A. No, from 1836. Q. Up to 1868, off and on, almost every year?—A. Yes. Q. And during that time you saw very little fog in the bay ?—A. No, not a great deal. - Q: What was the duration of the longest fog you ever saw in the bay ?—A. I could not tell you. Sometimes the fog lasted for twelve hours, but I do not know that it continued longer than that ; such is not to my knowledge, as far as I can recollect, but it might have been longer sometimes. Q. It was of very rare occurrence that the fog lasted longer ?—A. I think so. We very rarely saw a fog after we were once in the bay; up by the island and past East Point and up on Banks Orphan and Brad- ley, and such like, you would have very little fog. Q. Were you in the bay in 1851 ?—A. Yes; I then made two trips. Q. You must have been in the bay most of that season 2—A. Well ? Q. You were in the bay in 1851 and 1853; do you recollect of seeing any fog at all there during either of these years 2 In 1853 you were in the Highland Lass 2—A. In 1851 ſ was in the Alexander. Q. In 1851 you made two trips ?—A. I did not go home with my first trip ; I landed it with Mr. Martel, at Arichat; I had not time to go home, and so I landed 314 barrels there, and he advanced me the money to fit out. Q. In that season you were two trips in the bay, during the whole of the Summer and fall; when did you go out in the fall º–A. I think I left home on the 7th of July ; I usually left home on my fishing trips on the 7th of July, and I think that I arrived home about the 18th or the 20th of October. Q. You were in the bay during all the summer and a large portion of the fall ; do you recollect any one day during this period when you saw a fog in the bay in 1851 %–A. Well, I cannot say that it was then foggy, but there was a most almighty smoke. It was so smoky that you could not see anything for three, four, or five days; and owing to this fact that year I got out of the mackerel, and getting behind hand, I had to land those mackerel and could not go home. Q. Where did this smoke come from ?—A. From all round; from fires at Miramichi and on the West Shore, and up that way; the smoke was So dense that you could not see half a mile for three, four, or five days, all the way from North Cape over to Escuminac. - Q. I suppose that no person with eyes in his head could help knowing the difference between that and fog 2—A. Certainly; there was smoke but no fog. Q. Did that smoke hurt your rigging in any way?—A. No; the only way in which it hurt us was by preventing us getting any mackerel. Q. Do you recollect having seen any fog in the bay in 1853?—A. O, Well, these are questions that I could not answer correctly, and I do not Want to answer unless I can do so. We do not care anything at all about fogs, and though it might be foggy sometimes, we would not think anything about it, or remark it. There is nothing in a fog that Would be thought of importance. 2790 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. , Q. You landed these mackerel at Arichat?—A. Yes. Q. Did you afterwards take them away?—A. Yes; but not until I had taken to Gloucester the 214 barrels which I caught on my Second trip. I then returned to Arichat, took these 314 barrels on board, paid charges, and came home. Q. Did not the landing of these mackerel at Arichat enable you to come back to the bay and take another fare?—A. Well, it enabled me to go back; but the heft of the vessels went home. I got out of the mack- erel on account of the Smoke. - Q. The right of so landing cargoes, or the exercise of this privilege, really does enable you to make a second and third trip, as the case may be 2–A. I think that if such landing was not practiced it would be money in our pockets; if we did not so land mackerel it would be money - in the owners' pockets. * - Q. Does it enable you to make extra trips, or more trips than would otherwise be the case?—A. Well, I should suppose that it would give us a little more time in the bay. Q. And more opportunity for catching fish 7–A. It gives us perhaps 10 days more. I have made the passage from Canso home and back again, and packed my mackerel, in 10 days. Q. But you would not put that time forward as a specimen voyage 3– A. No. 2 Q. How long would it take ordinarily to make this passage %–A. Well, two weeks or fifteen days would give ample time to go and come back and pack the mackerel, and fit out. - - Q. Would not a fortnight in the height of the fishing season be a very important period, particularly if mackerel were then plentiful ?—A. Mackerel might be plentiful in bad weather. Q. I mean during good fishing, with all the circumstances favorable for it'—A. If all the circumstances were favorable, I could load one of these vessels in five days. w Q. And those five days would then be very important 3–A. Yes; in five days I could fill up, if the maekerel were just as I wanted them ; but it would be pretty hard to get them in that way. Q. Are not mackerel fish that move about the bay from place to place 3—A. Yes. Q. Sometimes they go inshore and sometimes they go out 3—A. Dur- ing the first part of the year they go to the nor’ard, but after September they move right round and come to the southward, School after school— that is their track, and the man who keeps the best run of the mackerel gets the most of them. - Q. Can you swear that they come southward?—A. No ; but I know the way in which they are caught. Say they are on Banks Orphan and Bradley, then the next thing they will be gone to North Cape, and next they will perhaps be down square off East Point; and they will go along in that Way. Q. There are no marks about mackerel by means of which they may be distinguished ?–A. Not a bit of it; they may be caught off North Cape day after day, and then sink, and afterward rise and sink again, leaving no sight of them anywhere; when they come up, we may get a good day’s work, 75 barrels or such like for perhaps two or three days; and he who keeps the best run of their movements, will obtain the best Share of the fish. Q. The mackerel which are caught on Banks Orphan and Bradley, and are afterward lost sight of, you cannot pretend to say you recognize as the same fish, in the fish which afterward rise up off North Cape and AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 27.91 East Cape 7–A. Well, I cannot identify them as the same ; but that is the Way in which we catch them, whether they are the same mackerel Or not. Q. Can you undertake to say that there are not different schools of mackerel ?—A. Of course not. I cannot tell you that. Q. Did you ever take them early in the spring when they are very poor?—A. Well, one year I went out in the Abigail for early mackerel into North Bay; but that is the only year I did so. This was in 1851. I then fished on Banks Orphan and Bradley. - Q. You did not get into the bay that year until the middle of July 7– A. In the Abigail” - Q. In 1851 you said you left home on the 7th of July 2–-A. In some vessels I left home on that date; but I left in that vessel in June. Q. I think you told me that you made two trips to the bay that year?— A. I did. tº Q. And that you left home on the 7th of July 7—A. I said the 7th of July here, but I did not say the 7th of July yesterday. I did not say anything about the 7th of July, except to-day. I left on the 7th of July in the Rose Skerritt, and in the Oliver Cromwell, and for a number of years I left Gloucester on that date. Q. When was this?—A. I went out in the Abigail in June, 1851. Q. You told me previously that in 1851 you made two trips and started on the 7th of July 7–A. Well, then, we will rectify that; I went in June in the Abigail, and got my trip on Banks Orphan and Bradley; and my second trip, 75 barrels, in the bend of the island. Q. That was very early 7–A. I went very early for poor mackerel. Q. That is the season when the mackerel are thin 3—A. Yes; we call them leather-bellies; they are full of spawn, and mackerel number threes large, but nothing except number threes. Q. You do not catch number ones during that part of the season 7– A. No. . *. Q. The best mackerel are caught in the fall 3—A. You can get as good mackerel along in the last of August and in September as at any time. Q. Did you ever look at the eyes of those fish which you call by that elegant and I dare say appropriate name, to see whether there was a film over them 3–A. Well, a maxim is current among fishermen, that. When the scale comes off their eyes they are apt to bite. Q. You do know of this, then 3–A. I do not know that the film exists; I have looked a number of times, but I could never perceive whether the scales were off or not. Q. How long is it since you first heard of their having scales on their eyes 3–A. O., since I first went to the United States. - Q. And as soon as these scales come off they are ready to bite %–A. That is the assertion which is made, but I do not know whether it is the case or not. - ***. Q. Did any person ever start a theory to you, to give a reason why there should be scales over their eyes?—A. No ; but I have heard old Mr. Atwood, of Provincetown, speak about it, though I cannot say Whether he knows much about it or not. l never paid much attention to his statements. Q. Do you think that Mr. Attwood is a little wild in his theories?— A.. I do not know. I have often heard him speak about these things; of course what he said might all be so, but from my experience I do not: think it; what he said went in at one ear and came out of the other, for my part, and that is about the heft I got of it. 2792 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. How did the idea about these scales become current among fisher- men 2–A. I suppose it was due to their talking the matter over. When mackerel do not bite very well they will ask whether the scales are off their eyes or not, and say that when the scales are off they will have a fair catch; and they are always very anxious to examine the fish to See whether the scales are Off. Q. Could they see whether this was the case or not *—A. I do not know that they could. Q. How do you suppose that the idea started ?—A. I could not tell yOll. -- Q. This idea is general, at any rate %–A. It was talked about among the fishermen. Q. And generally believed among fishermen 3—A. I cannot say ; but I do not believe in it, for One. Q. But you are not all the fishermen 3–A. Of course not ; but I do not believe in it. " I cannot speak in this regard for others. I know, how- ever, that it was the general talk among fishermen, and I have seen a great many examine the fish to see whether the scales were off; they wait for this patiently, hoping to get a good deck of mackerel when the scales come off. - g Q. How many barrels of flour would you put on board of the fishing vessel with 16 men, leaving Gloucester 7—A. Eleven or twelve. Q. What kind of flour would this be?—A. It would generally be the best. Q. What would it cost 2—A. From $9 to $10 a barrel. Q. That was during the war 7—A. And before the war. Q. You do not mean to say that this was the case before the War 3– A. It was sometimes $8 a barrel. The price varied. Q. Do you not know that the price was nearer $5 than $8 %–A. The price might have been $5 here, but this was not the case up with us. The price has never been $5 a barrel since I have been in the States. Q. Or $6 or $7 ?—A. I have paid $7, $8, and $9 a barrel for it, and so on; we do not buy poor trash, but the best flour. The best flour make the best bread, and is the cheapest in the end. t Q. How much does coal cost"—A. We did not use to take coal with us at all ; but of late years it has been taken. t Q. What kind of coal is generally taken 3–A. Hard coal. Q. What do you pay for it"—A. The price varies from $7 to $8 a ton. Q. That must surely have been the price in American currency, when greenbacks were at a considerable discount º–A. Yes. Q. Because the hard coal used in these provinces comes from the States?—A. Certainly; we burn it mostly. I never took it with me but one or two years, and that was when I was in the Scotland. Q. If we can get such coal here at $5 a ton, how is it that the prices of it in the States is $6 or $7?—A. It comes to us from Philadelphia in freighters, and we pay $5, $6, and $7 a ton for it. Q. Can it be possible that you pay more for this coal in your own country than we do here 3—A. Yes; this coal is worth $6 a ton to-day in the United States. I have paid $6 and $6.50, and $6.25 is the price on which I have agreed for this winter's supply. Q. How many tons of coal would you take on a vessel ?—A. No more than five, at any rate. * * Q. Where have you obtained your wood 2–A. Generally at Canso ; We always made a point of doing so. * Q. Because it is cheap at Canso 2–A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2793 Q. What is it a cord there?—A. $3 for about seven feet; they call that a cord down there. Q. During your experience in the bay, what was the highest price you paid for a cord of wood 3–A. $3 to my knowledge. Q. Did you ever fish very much within the limits in the bay, after the repeal of the Reciprocity Treaty, in 1866?—A. I have tried inshore, but I never found that I could do anything there. I invariably did better off Shore. Q. Was this because you had to watch the cutters?—A. No ; I did not have to watch them when we had reciprocity. Q. I am speaking of the time when this treaty was abrogated; from 1866 to 1868, did you fish a great deal inshore without licenses?—A. No, I did not. I did not fish inshore while I was in the Scotland at all. I got the heft of my mackerel around the Magdalen Islands. Q. Do you mean to say that you never fished inshore at all ?—A.. I have tried inshore, but I never got mackerel there of any account. yº. These three years followed the close of the American war?——A. €S. Q. And then you were not obliged to be armed to the teeth as be- fore ?—A. No. Q. Did any cutters ever seize or try to seize you ?—A. In those years? * Q. Yes.—A. No. Q. But previously 7–A. Yes. Q. When 3—A. In 1851. Q. Where were you seized in 1851 –A. I was not seized. I never Was Seized. Q. Was any attempt made to seize you?—A. Yes. - Q. Where were you then fishing %–A. It was at the last of my trip when I got those 214 barrels. - Q. Where were you fishing?—A. Wide off Margaree—between that and Cheticamp. • Q. Which cutter attempted to seize you?—A. A man named Cutler, from Guysborough, was there in a little pinkey; he was a spy, and he used to make compromises when vessels got a good deck of mackerel anywhere and were dressing them inshore. He would take 20 or 10 barrels, making as good a bargain as he could. This Cutler was in this pinkey, and I was at anchor under Margaree Island at the time. * Q. Were you lying close inshore?—A. I was at anchor and not fishing. Q. Lying close inshore ?—A. Yes, right close in under Margaree for shelter. He did not attempt to take me; if he had I would have given him a clout, but he took another vessel, the Harp, Captain Andrews. I kept a watch all night, but they did not come alongside; if they had, We Would have given them grape-shot, I bet. Q. Had you grape-shot on board?—A. We had a gun loaded with Slugs, or something of that sort. f Q. In fact, then, you were never boarded by a customs or seizing officer 3–A. I was boarded by an officer who came for light-money, at Little Canso, that same year. { Q. Did you pay the light-money?–A. No. Q. Why?—A. Because this man was not authorized to receive it. Q. What did you do?—A. I hove him into his boat, of course, and got rid of him. Q. You knew that the light-money was due 2—A. Certainly; and I Was Willing to pay it, had the right man come for it. - 2794 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Did he represent himself to be a custom-house officer 7—A. Yes. Q. Did you ask him for his authority?—A. Yes. Q. And did he show it 3–A. No. Q. And then you threw him overboard 7–A. I told him he had to leave, and seeing he would not go, I seized him by the naps of the neck and the breeches and put him into his boat. He was bound to take me because I had landed a poor girl. - - Q. Was this girl contraband 2–A. Yes, I suppose they called her so at any rate. I do not know that she is now in town, but she became lawyer Blanchard’s wife afterward. I merely took her on board as a passenger, and landed her. Afterward I was fired at and chased by three cutters. Q. For putting this officer overboard 2–A. No, I did not put him overboard, but I put him into his boat. § Q. In lawyer's phrase, did you gently lay hands on him 7–A. I put him in his boat in the shortest way. He stripped off and said it would take a man to handle him, but I made up my mind that he should not stop, though I did not want to fight; still, I was well able to take my own part. I talked with him and told him that I had merely landed a poor girl with her effects, a trunk and a bandbox, &c.; but this would not do him. When he came aboard he asked, “Who is master of this vessel ?” Says I, “I am for lack of a better.” Says he, “I seize this vessel,” and with red chalk he put the King's broad R on the main mast. IHe wanted the jib hauled down in order to have the boat taken on board—we had not come to an anchor—but I told him that he would have to wait a while. Finally he came down below and I took the pa- pers out of a canister; and being a little excited, of course, in hauling off the cover a receipt for light-dues, which I had paid that year, dropped on the forecastle floor. He picked it up and said he would give me a receipt on the back of it. Says I, “Who are you?” He answered “I am Mr. Bigelow, the light-collector.” “Well,” says I, “where are your documents º' Says he, “I have left them ashore.” “Then,” says I, “go ashore, you vagabond, you have no business here.” Says he, “Won't you pay me?” “Not a red cent,” says I; “out with you.” He cried out, “Put the helm down.” Says I, “Put the helm up "; but he came pretty near showing us ashore, as we were within 10 fathoms of the rocks. Says he, “Who are you ?” I said, “I am Mr. Pattillo.” Says he, “You vagabond, I know the Pattillos.” “Well,” says I, “ then you must know me, for there are only two of us.” Says he, “I will take you any- how; I will have a cutter from Big Canso. There will be a man-of-war there; and if there is not a man-of-war, there will be a cutter; and if there is not a cutter I will raise the militia, for I am bound to take you.” I asked him if he meant to do all that, and he said he was just the man to do it. I seized him to put him back into his boat, and he stripped off and told me that it took a man to handle him ; with that I made a lunge at him, and jumped 10 feet. If he had not avoided me, I would have taken the head off his body. I then seized him and chucked him into his boat. Then three cutters came down and chased me. Q. But they did not catch you ?—A. No ; that was the time when they chased me at Port Hood and around there, and fired 11 balls—12-pound- ers—at me, one boring her right through and through. The first shot flew about 6 feet over my head, through the mainsail ; the next went right under the bends, through a plank, cut the timber, and went through a sail and into the main-boom; the next struck on the port side, taking a piece of about 5 or 6 inches out of the bulwarks, and striking the main chains; the next knocked a piece off the forward part of the main-mast, AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2795 about 4 inches above the saddle of the main-boom ; and the next struck. in the windlass-bit; five shots struck us, and we were chased between 6 and 7 miles. .* - Q. When did you go to Newfoundland for bait 2–A. I was there, in Fortune Bay, in the Tiger. I was on the first vessel that ever got her- rings there. Q. Did you get the fish right inshore?—A. Yes, we got them through the ice ; I was frozen in. Q. When was this?—A. I left Cape Cod on this trip in 1838, and I arrived home again in 1839. Q. Did you stay during the winter at Fortune Bay ?—A. Yes. b Q. You got a cargo through the ice º–A. Yes, up at the head of the ay. - * Q. Inshore ?—A. Yes, right inshore. An army of 30 men, all armed to the teeth, came there to take us—five men and a black boy ; but I drove the whole calabash of them off. Q. You succeeded in securing a cargo, and in getting safe home 2– A. Yes. Q. Did you sell any of your cargo before you left?—A. No. Q. Did you lose your papers?—A. Yes; they were taken from me. I handed them to the man who came to see about it, when I went on the ice. He said his name was Gadin, and that he came from Harbor Briton, on my asking who he was; I then asked to see his documents, and he handed them to me. I then knew what I had to do, and I gave him my papers; but I was too honest; I ought to have kept possession of his documents until he had handed me back my papers, but did not do so. Finally, I requested him to give me my papers, but he went off with his army. - Q. You staid all winter there ?–A. We stopped there as long as We could, and took herring out of the ice. We got out of the ice on the 17th of April and reached home on the 14th of May. No. 68. Prof. SPENCER F. BAIRD, assistant secretary of the Smithsonian Insti- tution, Washington, and United States Commissioner of Fish and Fish- eries, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn, and examined. By Mr. Dana: Question. It is not necessary, of course, to ask this witness any ques- tions to show his position or general acquaintance with and knowledge of the subject. I would like, however, to have you state, if you please, as I am going to give, by and by, some of the results of your inquiries— I Would like to have you state particularly how you have obtained, and from what sources you have obtained, information respecting the fisheries of late, besides what you have studied in books.-Answer. I have been in the habit for five years past of spending from two to three months on the sea-coast, for the purpose of prosecuting inquiries into the con- dition of the fisheries, to determine whether, as alleged, the American Coast fisheries have been decreasing, and to ascertain what steps, if any, might be adopted to remedy the difficulty, if found. I have, in pursu. ance of that work, established stations in successive years at Eastport, Portland, Salem, Woods Holl, on the south coast of New England, and at Noank. And I have had with me a force of experts, naturalists, and gentlemen interested in the biology of fishes, and have endeavored to 2796 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. gather such information as I could, from my own personal observation, and that of my colleagues, as well as by inquiries from fishermen and Others whom I have met. Q. How far have you prosecuted that personal inquiry of the fisher- men and persons engaged in the fisheries?—A. I have, by the help of a phonographic secretary, taken the testimony of many hundreds of fish- ermen along the coast in reference principally to questions in the natural history of fishes. The facts as to the statistics of the fisheries have come out incidentally, and were not the original object of my inquiry. I was interested more in determining what kinds of fish we had, what natural, physical, or moral causes influenced them, and what would prob- ably be the result of these causes, and how any evil influences could be refnedied. º - Q. Then have you employed fishermen to examine and make in- quiries?—A. I have had in my employ several men, some for the whole year, or several years in succession, and others for a part of the year, who have taken a series of printed questions that I prepared in regard to the natural bistory of fishes and pursued these inquiries in regions where I myself could not go conveniently, especially in the winter season or in the early spring. • . * Q. Then you issued some printed circulars?—A. Yes; a great many thousand blanks, inviting responses, and I have had a reasonable per- Centage of returns, of which I consider a fair percentage more or less reliable. But, as a general rule, as everybody knows, fishermen know less about fish than they do about anything else. That is to say, they know how to catch fish and the practical details of their business, but of their natural history they know very little. About such questions as the time of their migration, the rate of their growth, their spawning Seasons, and other matters, only here and there will you find a man who has observed and noted the facts closely enough to be able to answer your questions. * Q. You employed some such persons?—A. I have one man especially, a skilled fisherman, resident on the south coast of New England, and Whom I employ to visit the different fishing stations and gather sta- tistics. * Q. Have you any of those circulars about you?—A. I have one. (Cir- cular produced.) - Q. (Reading circular.) There are something like nearly ninety dif- ferent questions. Under one head you require the man's name, &c. Then as to the distribution of fishes: what kind of fish he has in his neighborhood, their abundance, migrations, movements, food, relation- ships, reproduction, artificial culture, diseases, pursuits, capture, their economical value, application, &c.—A. That circular was issued in 1871. I have issued a great many editions of it. Then I have another circular Which refers more particularly to the coast and river fisheries. I have Only issued this within the present year. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Was that about the time, Professor?—A. Yes; the first thing I did was to distribute these questions in order to get as much in- formation as I could. I have some eight or ten special circulars, but these are the ones I have most used. I have issued special circulars for "... and mackerel and menhaden, but of these I have not copies with me. By Mr. Dana: - Q. Here (referring to circular spoken of as issued during the present AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2797 year) you have the home fisheries, the river fisheries; they don’t come directly under our cognizance.—A. These are the coast and river fish- eries particularly. Q. Not the deep sea?—A. Only incidentally. They are sea coast fish, but not outside. There is a schedule of the principal fish marketed in the Boston market. My object was to get the number of pounds of these fish taken in the vicinity of the person to whom the circular was g1 Ven. 3. Q. You think these have been pretty fully answered ?—A. I have a great many answers. Q. And from your information, which you gather as you go about, from what is sent to you by the return of these circulars, and from the persons employed by you, it has been your business to make yourself fully acquainted with the subject 2—A. Yes; I have, of course, used What published material I have found. I found a great deal of value in the reports of the Canadian fisheries. What little I know of the fish- eries in Canada. I have learned from these documents. Q. Wherever there are documents published by the United States you have them 3–A. Yes; I have them ; and I have European docu- ments, English, and Norwegian, &c. I believe I have everything. Q. I will question you first about codfish. I want you to state what is your opinion about the cod as a fish for all sorts of commercial pur- poses, as compared with others.—A. I think the cod stands at the head of fish at the present day. There is no fish that furnishes food to so Imany people, the production of which is of so much importance, or Which is applied to such a variety of purposes. The commercial yield is very great, and its capture is the main occupation of a large portion Of the inhabitants of the sea-coast region of the Northern Hemisphere. Q. Besides as an article of food, either fresh or salted, what other purposes does it serve 3—A. Well, it is applied to a great many pur- poses by different nations. It is used, of course, as food in the different modes of preparation. Particular parts are used as food, other than the muscles. The sounds are used as food, converted into gelatine, and in the form of isinglass. They serve a great variety of purposes. The roes are used as food and bait for fish. The skin is tanned for leather and clothing. A great many nations dress very largely in the skins of Cod and Salmon. And the fish is dried and used as food for cattle in Iceland and Norway. The bones are used as fuel in some places; and, of course, the oil is used for medicine, and for the various purposes to Which animal oils are applied. There is scarcely any part that is not Valuable. The Offal, in Norway, is converted into a valuable manure. Every part is called into play. Q. The bones?—A. They are burned as fuel, as well as eaten by dogs, Or ConVerted into fertilizers. Q. It is not, probably, applied in the United States to all the uses you have specified ?–A. No ; I don’t think the skin is used as clothing in the United States, but it makes an admirable leather for shoes, and makes Very nice slippers. We have in Washington quite a large number of articles made from the skins, as used in Alaska, the Aleutian Islands, and in Siberia. - Q. You think they can be used ?–A. I have no doubt in the course of years the skin will be utilized very largely. In fact, I may remark, that at the late exhibition at the Westminster Aquarium, among the special articles exhibited were shoes made from leather of the codfish, furnished by an exhibitor from Christiania. Q. You think it is the foremost fish 7–A. I think it is. There is none 2798 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. that furnishes so important an industry or which is so abundantly or widely disseminated. i Q. What is the geographical distribution of the cod?—A. There are Quite a number of species of the cod, some characterized by certain peculiarities and some by others. The cod in the North Pacific is differ- ent from that in the North Atlantic. Both are, however, codfish, and no one could mistake them for anything else but cod. In the Atlantic the cod are found on the American side from the Winter Quarter Shoals, on the coast of Virginia; that is the most southern point I have traced it to ; from that indefinitely to the northward. It is found everywhere upon the coast, in the Bay of Fundy, the Bay of St. Lawrence, the Labrador and Newfoundland, on the Grand Bank, and many other places. The European species, although by some considered distinct from ours, probably have a geographical range equally extensive. I be- lieve they are not in Spitzbergen. Q. What is the most important locality 2–A. Probably the most im- portant single locality that furnishes the greatest amount of fish with the least possible labor in the shortest possible time is that in the vicinity of the Lofoden Islands, on the northwest coast of Norway. That is a region where usually twenty-five millions of fish are taken in three months by some twenty-five thousand men. The Dogger Bank, in the North Sea, is another European locality. In America the most exten- sive stores of cod are found, I suppose, on the Grand Banks and the Georges. They are found, perhaps, also on the great banks off the coast of Labrador, twenty or thirty miles off the coast, extending for hundreds of miles. Q. Now give the Commission some notion of the abundance of cod- fish.-A. Well, I have covered that point in my reply to the previous question. It is found in the greater part of those regions at some pov- tion of the year. It is usually more abundant in the spring or summer, autumn or winter, in each locality, in numbers only to be measured by the ability of man to capture. . - Q. What do you say of their migrations 2—A. The cod is a fish the migrations of which cannot be followed readily, because it is a deep-sea fish and does not show on the surface as the mackerel and herring ; but So far as we can ascertain, there is a partial migration, at least some of the fish don’t seem to remain in the same localities the year round. They change their situation in search of food, or in consequence of the Variations in the temperature, the percentage of salt in the water, or Some other cause. In the south of New England, south of Cape Cod, the fishing is largely off shore. That is to say, the fish are off the coast in the cooler water in the summer, and as the temperature falls ap- proaching autumn, and the shores are cooled down to a certain degree, they come in and are taken within a few miles of the coast. In the northern Waters, as far as I can understand from the writings of Prof. Hind, the fish generally go off shore in the winter-time, excepting on the South Side of Newfoundland, where, I am informed, they maintain their stay, or else come in in large abundance; but in the Bay of Fundy, on the coast of Maine, and still further north, they don’t remain as close to the Shore in winter as in other seasons. Q. Take them as a whole, then, they are a deep-sea fish. I don’t mean the deep sea as distinguished from the Banks 7–A. An outside fish 3 Well, they are to a very considerable extent. The largest catches are taken off shore, and what are taken inshore are in specially favored localities, perhaps on the coast of Labrador, and possibly off Newfound- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2799 land. They bear a small proportion generally to what is taken outside, Where the conveniences of attack and approach are greater. Q. Now, what is known about the spawning-grounds of codfish 7–A. We lack positive information in regard to the spawning-grounds of this fish, except that we know single localities. We know the Lofodon Isl- ands are great spawning-grounds. We know that the fish come there almost exclusively for the purpose of spawning. They are not there in the Ordinary times of the year. They come in December and January, and Spawn in February and March, and are there in most overwhelm- ing abundance. Q. But on the coast of America 7–A. We know there is one large Spawning-ground in Cape Cod Bay. - Q. You mean Massachusetts Bay inside?—A. Yes; there is said to be there a long reef about 4 miles wide and about 20 miles long, and the cod go in there and furnish a very important winter fishery. tº Q. Then, I presume, there are similar spots along the whole Ameri- Can Coast 3—A. Probably they spawn at the Georges, and undoubtedly in a great many localities in the Bay of St. Lawrence and on the Banks, although I cannot speak of that, because I haven’t had an opportunity of knowing. Q. What are the relations of cod to other fish 3–A. They are friends and enemies. They are warriors and victims. They are extremely Voracious, and devour everything that is small enough, without any kind of consideration, and in turn are consumed in all their stages by Such fish as can master them. The adult fish are principally interfered With by horse-mackerel, the bluefish, the porpoise, and by sharks, and anything else big enough to swallow them, instead of being swallowed by them. It is merely a question of size whether the codfish is the active or passive agent. Q. Now, what fish do they devour mostly 7–A. They eat everything, but they live very largely on herring or mackerel, or any of the small fish found on the sea bottoms. They devour crabs and small lobsters. The stomach of the cod is one of the best dredges you can have. You find there sometimes rare specimens that are never found elsewhere. Q. Do they digest the shells 2—A. No, they digest the nutriment and then throw out the shells. Sometimes you find the shells packed solid One inside of another like saucers in a pile. The wonder is how they empty them out. Q. But they do?—A. I suppose they must. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. They devour them whole and then when the meat is digested they eject the shells?—A. The mouth is quite large, and the shell goes out as easily as it goes in. - By Mr. Dana : Q. What do you think are the seasons for spawning on the American Coast”—A. I presume that, like many other fish, they may spawn over quite a range of time. But, so far as our own observation on the American coast goes, their season is from November until March. In Cape Cod Bay they spawn about December and January. I have no doubt, however, that farther north, where the changes of temperature are not so abrupt, they may spawn more irregularly, and have only an interval of a few months when there is no spawning. . Q. Will you describe this spawn so as to show the prolific nature of the fish 7–A. The cod is one of the brag fish in regard to spawning. That is, we hear of ordinary multiplication of fish by that process, but 2800 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. the cod has been found to contain from three to seven million eggs by actual count. Turbot, I think, are one of the very few fish that can beat it. They run up to twelve millions. Q. We do not have the real turbot ?—A. No. From three to five mil- lion might be considered a fair annual estimate of the eggs of the cod- fish. From three to five millions of ripe eggs have been found in the Ovary of one single cod, and more. Q. What becomes of these eggs when discharged ?–A. The question of the Spawning places for codfish has been one that was originally very uncertain. The researches of naturalists have shown that these eggs are discharged in the open sea on the Lofoden Banks. Some miles from the shore they can be found floating at the surface, and can be taken up by the bushel in towing nets. The eggs are very small, from one. ... twentieth to one-fiftieth of an inch in diameter, and they have a small globule of oil to make them float. Q. Now, do these eggs all produce fish unless they are injured in Some Way ?—No ; there are a great many contingencies. It is not likely that a Very large percentage will be fertilized by the male. There is always an uncertainty about that. Then, as they are floating in the water, every fish that may be fond of that kind of sustenance devours them very greedily, and by the time they are hatched out, a large percentage is destroyed in this way. Then, the young fry, while in a helpless state, are devoured in large numbers. I should think it extremely probable that not one hundred thousand out of the three millions—possibly not ten thousand—attain to a condition in which they are able to take Care of themselves. It is entirely impossible to make any estimate. We know, however, from the analogy of other fish—from the facts in regard to Salmon, shad, and that kind of fish we can make an approximation. Q. These eggs rise to the surface 3–A. They float at various distances from the surface down. Some are a little heavier and some a little lighter. I mean that they are not attached to the bottom. Their Specific gravity is very nearly that of the water. Of course when the water is cold they will float better, because the density is greater, but when the water is warm they will sink. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Before you leave this subject I would like to ask whether the spawn are visible in the ocean, that is, cod-spawn. What is the color?— A. It is transparent, with a little spot of oil in one corner. You Would not notice it under ordinary circumstances, but you might if you were looking for it. Q. The Ocean might be full aud a common man would not see it?—A. Certainly. Dy Mr. Dana : . Q. Be kind enough now to tell us what are the principal modes of capturing cod º–A. The modes of capture vary with the regions. For Commercial purposes, the fish are caught with hand-lines and the trawl- line, or long line as it should be called. It is taken very largely in gill- nets on the coast of Norway and in some other regions. I believe it is so taken on the coast of Labrador, but I don’t think it is taken fre- Quently on our own coast in nets. Q. To what extent is the trawl-line used ?–A. It is used all over the World. It is one of the oldest methods of catching fish. Q. From your investigation, do you think the capture of fish gen- erally, or codfish, or other kinds, by some contrivance like the trawl, \ AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2801 is as ancient as any other ?—A. I know it is. The Indians, the Aleutian Islanders, have used them. - Q. That was not derived from us 7–A. No. Travelers have found them in use when the first white men came among them. We have specimens in great number of the trawl of the native savage. Ours have only been brought in within the last five or six years. I don’t think it is possible to fix the date of the first use of the trawl. They have been traced back to such a period that there is no possibility of saying that it was introduced by this man or known to that one. Q. What are the advantages of the method of trawl-fishing for cod?— A. The alleged advantages, as far as I have heard them spoken of, are the larger yield of the fishery. The same number of men in the same time, and in the same locality, will catch a larger fare of fish with the trawl than with hand lines. Then they require less exposure of the fish- ermen. They can be set over night and left down through the day at times when the weather would be too inclement for hand-line fishing. Then it requires much less skillful fishermen to use the trawl than the hand lines. It is merely a matter of putting on the bait and throwing it overboard, and it does not require the delicate manipulation and skill that the hand-line fishing does, and therefore does not call into play to the same extent the functions of the practiced fisherman. Q. Now, are there any disadvantages connected with the use of the trawl alleged or actual 3–A. There are a great many accusations brought, against it. How far these are valid it is impossible for me to say. The principal objection I suppose is that it tempts all kinds of fish. One ob- jection is that it takes fish that are too small size. They use a smaller hook than the ordinary hand lines, and they say it takes a great many unmarketable fish, which affects the supply. Then another complaint is that the fish being longer in the water are liable to be destroyed by the depredations of sharks, dogfish, and fish of that class. Another objection is that after the fish are caught the marketable fish, owing to their weight, slip off from the Small hook and float away and are lost. Another objection is that they catch what they call mother fish, that is the parent fish, which some fishermen think should be left to reproduce their kind. Q. If they are taken after depositing their spawn you only lose one fish 7–A. Yes; but it is probable, judging from the testimony of fisher- men, that the fish can be taken during their spawning season with a trawl when they will not bite a hook. As a general thing very few will bite on the ordinary line, but the trawl bait is said to be attractive to them, and the fish are believed to be more likely to take the bait at that time from a trawl than from a hook on an ordinary line. Q. Well, taking the reasons given both ways, what conclusion have you come to about the use of the trawl for cod-fishing?—A. Well, it is just one of the wholesale modes of capture, which it is difficult to avoid, because the tendency is to centralize, to accomplish the same work by less expenditure of money and of human force. - Q. Do you think it is a case for prohibition or regulation ?—A. I don’t see how it can be either prohibited or regulated. I hardly see. Of course I have had no practical experience. I may say that the trawl is used very much less on the coast of America than on the coast of Eng- land and of Europe generally, and I have failed to find anywhere in the |Bnglish writers or in the testimony of the British Fishery Commission any complaint there such as occurs in America. There is a great com- plaint there against what is called the beam-trawl. When they speak of the trawl they don’t mean what we mean. What they refer to is a trawl 176 F. & 2802 Award 6F THE FISHERY COMMISSION. such as we use in our steamerº to capture flotinders and such fish. Wherever you see the word, trawl used by an English or European writer you must apply it to that large net that is dragged behind the vessel along the bottom of the sea. The word trawl isºever applied in Europe to the line, and, therefore; there is a great déâlºof vagueñess and error involved in the eonsideration of the subject unless you know what the particular speaker or witness means by Paºtrawl.º.But speaking of the long line, which is the general term, or builtow; I have failed to find in the reports of the British Fishery Commission any complaint by anybody except three cases of complaintºâgainst the trawl-line/or long ‘line.” One was that it destroyed the young fish, and the others were that they interfered with the fiefs.” They compläified that the trammelinet *espécially, which is a particular kind used in England, was fouled by these lines and injured...º.º. tº º ºsſi ºf ºil isº * Q. On the other hand, the net was in the way of the trawl?—A. No; the trawl was in the way of the nets. The trawlers"didn't care about ‘the net, but the net fishermen did compläinº of the trawl. But I have looked carefully to find whether there was any complaint against that line, and I haven't found it.” There maybe, but I am quite confident it has not assumed anything like the antágonistić features and impres- sion of magnitude that it has in the United States and Ameriga gen- .. érally. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . º tº as: . . . . ; Q. We mean by the traw] a long line weighted or anchored which sinks to the bottom and has- A. It has branehes three feet long. • * ; ; ; . . ... }. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " • . * c : , ; ; ; ; ; *... . . ; s: . . . .'; . . J iſ * is, * * *.i.º. 3 # 3 - : " , : # s # " : That is called a long line or bultow. Q. Then at intervals there are buoys?—A. Yes. . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. To show the position. They are usually in a straightline?–A. In "Europe there are generally several shorterlines united in one long line, so much so that on the coast of Great Britain they have a line of trawls six or eight miles in length. In America the trawling on the Banks is generally by means of five shorter lines radiating from the vessel, but in England the trawling is done generally on a large-scale, without row- boats, directly from a vessel of forty or sixty tons, and the entire series of lines is united in one and sunk. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " Q. They are hauled in from aboard the vessel, and not from a boat at all?—A. Yes, . . . . . . . . . . Q. Now, what do they gall that which we call a trawl, if it is used at “all 3–A. They call it a lofig line or bultow. º' º … . . . Q. What bait do you find to be the best for codfish?—A. Well, I can't say I find any bait to be the best, because I never caught many “fish, but I know that everything of an animal nature, and to some ex- tent vegetable, has been used for the cod. Generally, in America, our -bait consists of herring, menhaden, mackerel, a portion of the offal of the fish, sea-birds of various kinds, clams, squid, and the various species of shells, and in fact anything that can be got hold of . . . . . . . Q. Well, now, what are the methods of preservation of this bait 2 We have heard of their using 'salt claims, &c. Has much attention been paid to the possibility of greater preservation of the bait than we have "ever yet had 3–A. Yes; the science of preserving bait, as well as of the preservation of fish on shipboard, is very low indeed, far below what can be applied, and I have no doubt will be applied, both in keeping fish for food and in keeping it for bait. . . . . * Q. Now, will you state what observation you have made respecting the method of preserving fresh bait from the start all the voyage. through 7–A. As a general rule it is now preserved, either by salting or freezing. Of course they keep it as long as it will remain without AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2803 spoiling, and when you have to carry it beyond that time, either ice it or salt it. Salting, of course, is a very simple process, but it alters ma- terially the texture and taste to such a degree that fish or other bait that under certain circumstances is highly prized by the fish, is looked upon with a great deal of indifference when salted. Now, there are special methods of preserving the fish or bait by Some chemical preparation, which preserves the fish without, giving the saline taste. There are pre- parations by means of which oysters or clams or fish can be kept in So- lutions for six months without getting any appreciable taste, and with- process submitted to the group of judges of whom I, was chairman, was exhibited by an experimenter, who placed a great, jar of oysters in our room prepared in that way. I think about the 1st of August those were placed in our room and they were kept there until the middle of Sep- tember, for six weeks during the hottest portion of the centennial sum- mer, and that was hot, enough. At the end of that time we mustered up courage to passjudgment, upon this preparation; and Wetasted these oysters and could not find them affected....We would have preferred ab- Solutely fresh oysters, but there. Nººpºº, to the sensibili- ties, and I believe we consumed the entire jar. And, we gave the ex- hibitor, without any question, an award for an admirable new method. That man is now using that process on a very large scale in New York for the preservation of fish of all kinds, and he glaims he can keep them any length of time and, allow them to be used as fresh fish quite easily. I don’t suppose any fisherman ever, thought of using any preservative except salt. ºilº sº tº gº ºr º ºn tº a Q. That is entirely experimental 7–A. It is experimental, but it prom- ises very well. Now, borax is one of the substances that will preserve animal matter a great deal better than salt and without changing the tex- ture. Acetic acid is another preparation, or citric acid will keep fish a long time without any change of the quality, and by soaking it in fresh water for a little while the slightly acidulated taste will be removed. I don't believe a cod will know the difference between a clam preserved in that way and a fresh clam. . . . . . . . . . . Q. Now, about ice. We know a good deal has been done in the way of preserving bait in ice. How far has that got 2—A. It is a very crude and clumsy contrivance. They generally, break up the ice into pieces about the size of pebble stones, or larger; then simply stratify the bait or fish with this ice, layer and layer about, until you fill up a certain depth or distance. The result is that if the bait can be kept two weeks in that method it is doing very well. They generally get a period of preservability of two weeks. The ice is continually melting and contin- ually Saturating the bait or fish with water, and a very slow process of decomposition or disorganization, goes on until the fish becomes musty, flabby, and tasteless, unfit for the food of man or beast. - Q. Well, there is a newer method of preservation, is there not ?—A. There is a better method than using ice. The method described by the Noank witness, by using what is equivalent to snow, allows the water to run off or to be sucked up as by a sponge. The mass being porous pre- vents the fish from becoming musty. But the coming methods of pre- Serving bait are what are called the dry air process and the hard freezing process. In the dry air process you have your ice in large solid cakes in the upper part of the refrigerator and your substance to be preserved in the bottom. By a particular mode of adjusting the connection be- tween the upper chamber and the lower there is a constant circulation of air by means of which all the moisture of the air is continually being 2804 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. condensed on the ice, leaving that which envelops the bait or fish per- fectly dry. Fish or any other animal substance will keep almost indefi- nitely in perfectly dry air about 400 or 45°, which can be attained very readily by means of this dry air apparatus. I had an instance of that in the case of a refrigerator filled with peaches, grapes, Salmon, a leg of mutton, and some beefsteaks, with a great variety of other substances. At the end of four months in midsummer, in the Agricultural Building, these were in a perfectly sound and prepossessing condition. No one would have hesitated one moment to eat the beefsteaks, and one might be very glad of the chance at times to have it cooked. This refrigera- tor has been used between San Francisco and New York, and between Chicago and New York, where the trip has occupied a week or ten days, and they are now used on a very large scale, tons upon tons of grapes and pears being sent from San Francisco by this means. I had a cargo of fish-eggs brought from California to Chicago in a perfect condition. Another method is the hard frozen process. You use a freezing mixture of salt and ice powdered fine, this mixture producing a temperature of twenty degrees above zero, which can be kept up just as long as the -occasion requires by keeping up the Supply of ice and salt. Q. How big is the refrigerator 7—A. There is no limit to the size that may be used. They are made of enormous size for the purpose of pre- serving salmon, and in New York they keep all kinds of fish. I have been in and seen a cord of codfish, a cord of Salmon, a cord of Span- ish mackerel, and other fish piled up just like cord-wood, dry, hard, and firm, and retaining its qualities for an indefinite time. Q. Well, can fish or animals be kept for an unlimited period if frozen in that way ?—A. You may keep fish or animals hard dried frozen for a thousand years or ten thousand years perfectly well, and be assured ºthere will be no change. Q. Have geologists or paleontologists satisfied themselves of that by actual cases of the preservation of animal substances for a long period?— A. Yes; we have perfectly satisfactory evidence of that. About fifty years ago the carcass of a mammoth, frozen, was washed out from the gravel of the river Lena, I think, one of the rivers of Siberia, and was in such perfect preservation that the flesh was served as food for the dogs of the natives for over six months. Mr. Adams, a St. Petersburg merchant, came along on a trading expedition, and found it nearly con- sumed, and bought what was left of it for the St. Petersburg Academy of Science—the skeleton and some portion of flesh—which were pre- served first in salt and afterward in alcohol. Well, we know the period of time that must have elapsed since the mammoth lived in the arctic circle must be very long. We know we can talk with perfect safety of ten thousand years. The geological estimate of it is anywhere from fifty to a hundred thousand years; we cannot tell. There is no unit of measure; we know it must have been some hundreds of thousands, and probably it would have remained in the same condition as much longer. Q. Now, to come to a practical question, is this a mere matter of theory or of possible use 7 For instance, could this method be adapted to the preservation of bait for three or four months if necessary 3–A. The only question, of course, is as to the expense. There is no question at all that bait of any kind can be kept indefinitely by that process. I do not think there would be the slightest difficulty in building a refrig- erator on any ordinary fishing-vessel, cod or halibut, or other fishing vessel, that should keep with perfect ease all the bait necessary for a long voyage. I have made some inquiries as to the amount of ice, and I am informed by Mr. Blackford, of New York, who is one of the largest AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2805 operators of this mode, that to keep a room ten feet each way, or a thousand cubic feet, at a temperature of 200 above zero, would require about 2,000 pounds of ice and two bushels of salt per week. With that he thinks it could be done without any difficulty. Well, an ordinary vessel would require about seventy-five barrels of bait—an ordinary trawling-vessel. That would occupy a bulk something less than 600 feet, so that probably four and a half tons of ice a month would keep that fish. And it must be remembered that his estimate was for keep- ing fish in midsummer in New York. The fishing-vessels would require a smaller expenditure of ice, as these vessels would be surrounded by a colder temperature. A stock often to twenty tons would in all proba- bility be amply sufficient both to replace the Waste by melting and to preserve the bait. Q. Have you any doubt that some method like that will be put into immediate and successful use, if there is sufficient call for it 2—A.. I have no doubt the experiment will be tried within a twelvemonth. An- other method of preserving is by drying. Squid, for instance, and clams, and a great many other kinds of bait can be dried without using any appreciable chemical, and can be readily softened in water. I no- ticed lately in a Newfoundland paper a paragraph recommending that, in view of the fact that the squid are found there for a limited period of time, the people should go into the industry of drying squid for bait, So that it would always be available for the purpose of cod-fishing. I think the suggestion is an excellent one, and I have no doubt it will be Carried out. - Q. Now, what is the supply of bait for codfish on the American coast 7 —A. Well, as the codfish eats everything, there is a pretty abundant Stock to call upon. Of course, the bait-fish are abundant, the menhaden and herring. The only bait-fish that is not found is the caplin. The herring is very abundant on the American coast, and the alewives enor- mously abundant. Squid are very abundant of two or three species, and, of course, clams of various kinds. Then we have one shell-fish that we possess. It is never used here, although it is very abundant; but it is almost exclusively the bait for trawling on the coast of Great Britain. This shell-fish is known as the whelp, or winkle. Q. Is it a kind of mussel ?—A. No ; it is a kind of univalve shell (submits specimen), and is almost exclusively used for the capture of Cod in England on deep-water trawl-liners. It is not used here at all. Q. Why is it not used here?—A. I don’t know except that they have other bait that they get at more readily, and they have not learned how to use this. Q. But it is very abundant 3–A. Yes; quite as abundant as it is any- Where. This is a rather small specimen. The advantage of this kind of bait is that it can be kept alive for a long time merely by moistening it or keeping it in water, so there is no question about salting it or using ice or any other application. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Is there any particular locality for that ?—A. It is extremely abundant all through the northern seas. I am a little surprised that I have not seen more of them here. It is a northern shell. I presume it is very abundant in Newfoundland, and to the north. At any rate it is in any desired abundance in the Bay of Fundy, but not south of Cape Cod. * Q. From all you have learned, have you any doubt that, supposing the fishermen of the United States were precluded from using any bait ex - 2806 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. cept what could be got upon their own coast, they could obtain a suffi. cient supply there ?—A. Well, unless the American fishery should be expanded to very enormous limits, far in excess of what it is now, I can’t see that there would be any difficulty. I may refer to one bait at our command, which is an excellent bait—salt liver. In some parts that is considered an excellent bait. Of course each part of the world swears by its own particular bait. While the Cape Cod man swears by men- haden, the Newfoundlander by herring and caplin; and the Englishman by winkles, the Dutchman swears by salt liver. . . . . . . . . Q. We could have that, of course.—A. Yes. Then the roes of cod Q. What do you say about gurry 2 We had a good deal about that in the early part of this inquiry. Be so good as to tell what opinion you have or what conclusion you have come to about its use and abuse. —A. It hardly applies to cod any more than to any other fish cleaned at sea. The gurry is the offal, and that of course may be of salmon or cod or haddock or mackerel. The practice of throwing overboard gurry is in many respects reprehensible, because in the first place it is a very great waste of animal matter. The applicability of this offal to commer- cial purposes is such that whenever it can be had in sufficient quantities it should be utilized. It is so on the coast of Norway. An enormous number of pounds of fertilizer are made out of the gurry, and the heads are dried and used for food for dogs and cattle. I presume you refer, however, to the supposed influence of the gurry on the fishing grounds more particularly. Well, in the first place more of it can be used now. In the process of hard freezing applied to cod it is brought in more as a fresh fish. But a large proportion of what is thrown overboard can be utilized. It can all be utilized, and it would be very proper, I think, to impose some penalty upon the waste of the gurry by throwing it over- board, in favor of securing its preservation and utilization. But of course the question is as to what influence the gurry can exercise upon the sea fishery supposing it to be abundant and to be thrown over- board. I have no practical experience in regard to that. I know a great many persons testify that it is very objectionable. The reason why I should be inclined to attribute very little importance to the ob. jection is the readiness with which all such offal is consumed in the sea by the scavengers appointed by nature to destroy it. In the northern seas, where codfish are most abundant and this gurry is in the greatest abundance, the waters abound with countless numbers of minute crus. taceans whose business it is to destroy animal matter. The so called sea fleas are so active that if you take a fish the size of a codfish and put it in a bag of net-work and put it overboard where it will be exposed for a tide in water, of anywhere from five to ten or twenty fathoms, you will find, as a general rule, that next day you will have the bones picked clean and a perfect skeleton without a single particle of flesh. I have had thousands of skeletons (I may say literally so) of fishes and birds and Small quadrupeds prepared for museum purposes by simply expos- ing them to the action of the sea fleas. I have put them in bags perfo- rated with holes and left them at the edge of low tide for a tide or two, and the skeleton would be perfectly complete without a bit of meat left. ... Q. Well, these sea scavengers, are they usually at the bottom 3–A. Everywhere, at the bottom and the top. Then there are the dogfish, the Small sharks, catfish, goosefish, sculpins, and the codfish themselves, a Variety of lobsters, and other inhabitants of the sea, that are at work, always ready and eager to seize anything of this kind and consume it. Then when the bones are exposed there are the sea-urchins, that make AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2807. a specialty of devouring them. Now, I cannot say but that this mate- rial, under certain circumstances, may lodge in the crevices of the rocks and remain there and become an offense to the surrounding fish, but I rather suspect that the trouble about the gurry is that it attracts the predatory fish. Where it is thrown overboard it tolls them from a long distance. The dogfish, the shark, and other fish are attracted and come to the place where this offalº has been thrown overboard, and after they have consumed all that they turn their attention, to the cod and other fish that may be there and drive them off. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. So that even throwing overboard the gurry there is a danger of defeating your own purpose ?–A. Yes; certainly. That is the hypoth- 'esis given as to the supposed evil effect of throwing overboard the offalin the European waters. . It prevents the fishing there as long, as this state of things lasts, but whether there is an actualinjury otherwise I cannot Say. The general presumption is against the idea that these substances can have a lodgment for any length of time to produce any offense. It might do it in fresh water. In the lakes you may have such a condition Where those scavengers are not provided. But it, hardly seems to me that it call be in the seas, in the northern seas especially. ... . . . . . . . Q. What is the geographical distributionſ of mackerel ?— A. The mackerel is a fish that has not so northerly a distribution as the cod, and perhaps extends somewhat ; further south; otherwise, it is found over, to a very considerable extent, the same range. It is found as far. South as the Azores in European waters, and as far as Spitzber- gen, and Norway to the north. On our southern coast we find it very rarely, and very few individual-specimens have been taken in the vicinity of Charleston. It has never been taken in the West Indies; never in Bermuda, I believe; but it is found as far north as the Straits of Belle Isle, and ſhow much further north, I cannot say. ... The two species (American and European) are believed to be identigal, and although they are constantly within a comparatively small number of leagues of each other, yet they do occur all the way across. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. What is the season for mackerel ?—A. In America, the mackerel Season is in, spring, summer, and autumn. In winter they are not,found Onour, coast, and we don’t get them, but we have them on our shores as early as the middle of April and as late as November. . . . . . . . . . . . . . … Q. Now, as to the variation of seasons. What do you say about that? —A. ſlit is very rarely they appear in the sameſabundange in two succes: sive years, or, at least, it is rarely that the sum, total of the experience of-the-fishermen gives about the same aggregate. Sometimes, they are Sossgaree that, the ractual catch of one year will be much below that of other years, but we cannot say...there are any fewer fish actually in the water. It may be that they take a different line; they may keepin dif: ferent waters; they may show, themselves less to fishermen; and, may have other modes of variation; but we only know by the practical re; Sults of fishing that the catch in some seasons is much-greater than in others. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii., § Q. What do you think is known or what do you think is the best Conjecture as to their migrations 7–A. There have been a great, many hypotheses on the subject of the migration of mackerel. At one time mackerel, as was supposed to be the case with cod and sea-herring, Was believed to have an extreme range, that a large school traversed the goast of America for Europe, and swept over a range of thousands of miles, making a circuit that occupied one year in its completion. But, the evi- dence at the present time tends to show that the mackerel comes in on the American coast as a great army, broadside, and appears. Within a 2808 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. reasonable length of time, or very nearly the same time, on all that ex- tent of coast. Q. Do you think it strikes the coast a little later to the north and a little earlier to the south º–A. The left wing of the army, as we might call it, strikes the American coast first, and the right wing strikes the Bay of St. Lawrence last; but it comes in with a broad sweep, not mov- ing along the coast but coming in broadside. When the quickening in- fluence of the spring sun is felt on this great body of fish somewhere outside, where I cannot say, they start, and the given temperature is reached sooner at Cape Hatteras than at Bay St. Lawrence; but I do not believe that the fish that enter the bay always skirt the American coast, nor do I believe that the American fish go into the bay. They come in a large number of schools, each school representing a family, that is, they spawn together, and they may have a short lateral move- ment, and may move a limited number of miles along the coast till they find a satisfactory spawning-ground ; but, as a general rule, they aggre- gate in three large bodies; one of those bodies is about Block Island and Nantucket shoals, another is in the Gulf of Maine and Bay of Fundy, and another in Bay St. Lawrence. There are connections between those three bodies. You find them all along the coast; there are a certain number which spawn and are taken all along the coast; they are caught in weirs and pounds in spring and fall within one hundred yards of the shore; but the mass, as far as I can learn from the testimony pre- sented before the Commission, are aggregated in those three great bodies. Q. Is anything known about their winter quarters ?—A. Nothing definite. We miss them for several months, from the end of November until March and April, and we say, we guess, we suggest they go into the Gulf Stream. That they go somewhere where they can find a tem- perature that suits them and there they remain, is clear; but it is a little remarkable that they never have been seen schooling in the Gulf Stream, that they never bave shown themselves, that no fisherman, mackereler, or steamboat captain has ever reported, so far as my information goes, a school of mackerel in the winter season. If they were free swimmers, one would suppose they would show themselves under such circum- staces. There is a belief very generally entertained among fishermen that they go into the mud and hybernate. That is an hypothesis I have nothing to say against. It seems a little remarkable that so free a swimmer as the mackerel should go into mud to spend its winter, but there is abundance of analogy for it. Plenty of fish bury themselves in mud in the winter time and go down two or three feet deep. There are fish that are so ready to bury themselves in mud you can dig them out of an almost dry patch as you could potatoes. The European tench, the Australian mud-fish, and dozens of species do that. There is nothing whatever in the economy of the mackerel or in the economy of fish gen- erally against this idea, that it is an inhabitant of the mud. And the fishermen believe that the scale, which grows over the eyes, according to their account, in winter, is intended to curb their natural impetuosity and make them more willing to go into mud and stay there in Winter and not be schooling out on the surface of the water. There are well- authenticated cases of fish being taken from the mud between the prongs of the jig when spearing for eels. That this has occurred off the Nova Scotia coast, in St. Margaret's Bay and Bras d’Or, Cape Breton, and parts of the Bay of St. Lawrence, I am assured is not at all doubtful. Q. Do not fishermen mainly retain the old theory of the northern set of the whole body ?–A. Very largely, but I think latterly they are changing their views. - - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2809 By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. The fish were mackerel that were brought out of the mud 7—A. When after eels they brought up mackerel out of the mud, in several instances, in January. - By Mr. Dana : Q. What can you tell the Commission about the period of the spawn- ing of mackerel ?—A. Mackerel spawn almost immediately after they visit our shores. The earliest fish taken in the weirs and pounds in Vineyard Sound and Buzzard's Bay are full of ripe spawn, so that when the fish are taken out of the pounds and put into boats to bring them to Shore there are sometimes quarts and pecks of the spawn in the bottom of the boats. It runs out with the utmost freedom, as it does with any full-spawning fish. That period ranges from the middle of May on our coast, and from June and July in Bay St. Lawrence. Mr. Whiteaves Says they spawn in Bay Chaleurs in June. The season extends from the early part of May to the beginning of July. Q. Where do the mackerel deposit the eggs?—A. The mackerel, like all sea fish, with the exception of the herring, the tom-cod, and scul- pin, has a free floating egg. The egg is discharged in the water wher- ever the fish happen to be, inshore or offshore, and it floats just under the same condition that the egg of the cod does. It has a small globule of oil as a buoy, and it floats on the surface or anywhere from that to half Way down, or, perhaps, almost to the bottom, depending on the gravity of the egg and the specific gravity of the water. * Q. Is the mackerel supposed to be able to control the time when it will spawn 2–A. When the egg is ripe it has to be discharged, what- ever happens. The egg cannot be retained after it is overripe. Q. How do the eggs of each mackerel compare in numbers with those of the cod 3–A. The average of the mackerel spawn is about . 500,000. They are very small, as you can imagine, for mackerel is not a Very large fish. The eggs, when spawned, are only about one-fiftieth of an inch in diameter, about half the size of that of the cod. They vary in size, some being smaller and others larger, but they only vary Within moderate limits. Q. You Say they spawned all along the American coast 7–A.. I pre- Sume they spawn in some numbers along the entire coast from the shore of Virginia to the coast of Labrador; formerly they spawned on the coast of Newfoundland, when mackerel were caught there, where they were Very abundant a great many years ago, and also off the Bay of Fundy, When mackerel were abundant there. Q. What is the food of the young mackerel?—A. The young mackerel, like the young of most other fish, feed on diatoms and other marine plants of low origin. They feed on the eggs of crabs and marine animals, probably on the small eggs of fish themselves, and as they grow they eat anything small enough to be swallowed. They don’t bite as bluefish do, but they take everything at one mouthful and swallow it whole. Q. And what is the food of the adult fish 7–A. The adult fish feed Very largely upon young fish, sand lantz and young herring, and prob- ably upon the young of their own kind. They are cannibals, as all fish are. They feed very largely upon what is called hay-seed or cayenne; that is a minute kind of shrimp, which is so diminutive you require a micro- Scope to separate it into its component parts. They feed also on large Shrimps and on the young of large crabs. Its favorite food in summer is what fishermen have described as all-eyes, that is, young fish which, So far as I can judge, must be young mackerel, because I do not know 2.8:1 (). AWARE): 6) F. THE EISHERY COMMISSION. any other fish that could be so abundant of that size at that season of the year. ... It is ealled all-eyes, because its body is perfectly transparent, and, when you see them swimming in the sunlight you;can only see two eyes, as two small, dark specks. That occurs in almost incredible abun- dance, covering miles square, and furnishing food for an enormous yield Of fish. - * , * -- - *** * 3” . . . .” § 3 ; , ; , *... . ; ; *. d ...Q. Withiregard to its bearingitipon the locations of maekerel, ºf will ask whether there is any particular place where the food of imaekerelis to be found, or whetheritisfahºalong the coast where the mackerel come?—A. The shrimp belongs to a class of crustaceans which inhabit the high seas everywhere. We took them this year in great quantities inteoming across from Sālemſ to Halifax, at George's; Ea: Have, and Brown's Banks, and in Halifax Harbor. We take them in Eastport, Salem, and Portland Harbors, ārīd; as far as Isaias advised, by the spe- cialists who are associated with me, there is no part of the ocean where these small animals are not to be fouñd in ample abundance, sometimee enormously aggregated and katº otheritimesºfess commoniº They are found at all depths of water; from the surface to the bottom. We take them in our dredge and in our midway and surface nets; it Those and the young of the large Grabs are found under all circumstances and con- ditions.” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . º ... . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . dº ſº. ; : . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. Then we take the common bait, pogies; or menhaden. They are ackerel bait, are they not?–A. Eaten by mackerel? 'I do not think they are, unless they eat them in the winter time: As to the spawning of pogies, we know nothing about it; we infer they spawn in winter off the southern coast. . . . * * º sº º sº. "… . . . . ; . Q. Are not menhaden used as-bait for mackerel by fishermen?—A. The menhaden itself is taken all through the mackerel season at some part of the American coast. * * * & 3 º' ', Q..Is it abundant within your observation ?–A. Yes; it is almost the most abundant of our fish;indeed; it is a question which is most abun- dant, sea-herring or menhaden.º. i. º. ºf 33: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. In regard to the catching of mackerel as affecting the supply, and the probable diminution or increase of mackerel, what have you to tell the Commission about the mode of taking mackerelº–A. The maekerel is taken in a great variety of ways.º.At présent it is taken by jig hook and by the net in some form: Formerly it was taken by means of hooks, âs we do for bluefish, sailing backward and forward in a; boat having a number of lines put from the vessel, and taking them when the vessel is under full speed. That method is still practiced on the coast of Eu- rope, where mackerel are still taken in that way.” Thénit was found thät by keeping the vessel comparatively motionless and throwing chum orighopped meat overboard mackerel could be brought up to the vessel, and that proved a much morèsefficient and thorough mode of capture. Nets were introduced; and imany mackerel are now taken in gill-nets. Seines, which are hauled to the shore, have been introduced at some places on the coast of Nova Scotia, and a good many ſmackereliaré taken in pounds and weirs, enormous quantities being taken in spring and fall on the New England coast in that way: The purse-Seine is perhaps the most efficient and comprehensive method, and it is used by vessels. Q. What is the proper depth of a purse-seine?–A. Twenty, twenty- five, or thirty fathoms deep. Tº , , ; ; ; , - -1 30. To be successful it has to have that depth?–A. It has to be deep, but it must be shallower than the water, or it will get ſentangled and * Q. Do you know whether it is true that theſe imúšt be that depth in ; , ; , , , . . . . . . . . . . . ." § 3 ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ) is , , AWARE). OF THE, FISHERY COMMISSION. 2811. order that the mackerel shall not discover it so quickly and escape?—A. I could not say; that is a fisherman's theory, which I know nothing about. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * 5.Q. With regard to the preparation of mackerel, what have you, to Say?–A. Nothing, except that they are used in inóreasing numbers fresh. The principal consumption in Europe is in fresh fish. The peo: ple there do not salt fish, or scarcely at all. They are put up in Europe, and I believe, to some extent, in Canada in cans; I do not think that is done in the United States. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; Q. Of course, you have obtained information as to the manner in which the fish can be used by consumers; you have nothingto, do with the mercantile side of the question ?–A. No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. You have had it presented to you. Do you find that the demand for fresh fish of all kinds is increasing?—A.. I know the tendency at the present day is to substitute fresh fish for salt, in view of the improved methods of preparation and preservation, arid the improved means of communication, railroads and steamboats coming to the shores and car- rying away the fish and distributing it over an extent of thousands of miles and more in the interior, it bringing a much better price as fresh fish; and yielding a much better profit to the seller. . . . . . . . . . . . tº Q. Is that trade rapidly increasing?—A. It is increasing with enor- mous rapidity. Every year witnesses a great extension of the methods and increased improvements in the mode of preparation and the size of theºrefrigerators and their number. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . & Q. In regard to herring, what have you to say ?–A. Herring is a fish of wide range. Though I cannot say it goes further north than cod— perhaps; it does not—it goes scarcely as far:South on the American cóast. I have not found any evidence of it being taken south of Block Island. It is very abundant off. Block Island and Narragansett Bay in winter, but whether it is found further south. I am unable to say; it is found, as far north as Labrador, and much further. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; Q. It is found from Block. Island to the shores of Labradorini great abundance %—A. Yes: º tº . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. It is pretty fairly distributed allºalong?—A.; Yes;...in some locali- ties they are found in greater abundance at soméperiods of the year; but ºthere is no part of the American coast, from Labrador to: Block Island, where they are not found during a certain number:of months. ...Q: What are the movements of this fish?–A. Theyºpresent migra. tions not so extensive and demonstrative as that of mackerel, but more So than those of cod. They probably move from their ground from time. to time in search of food, and generally have definite praces for spawn- ing, to which they resort at different seasons of the year at each par- ticularićoast. While the spawniis-deposited; as a general rule, inºcer- tain localities, it is sometimes a matter of uncertainty. The destruction of herring has been less in America; than in Europe, where it has been Very marked. There are extensive regions where formerly the herring business was carried on, from which they have entirely disappeared, so much so that they import herring from Scotland and America. º. i. Q. As to the egg of the herring?—A. The egg is larger than that of the God, and is about one-twentieth of an inchin diameter. #.… . . . . . Q. What is the number to each fish 7–A. About 30,000. ” ºf it: tº . Q. Do; you think they have any partiéular spawning-ground 3+A. They have definite localities that are preferred by them. They spawn round the Magdalen Islands in great abundance, and in the bays of Newfoundland.” The most extensive. * > * *x - ~s $x Q. The bluefish is a great fish in the market?—A. It is the princi. - * - - • * , - ... * * ~ * : * • ?: , ; « . . . . f– ' . .” 3. - f * > * º, Caught affaiong the shores?-A All along the coast, being most abundant in the summer season toward Cape Cod, and in winter, in North Carolina. . . ...Q. There is a great drift through, Vineyard Sound?—A. There is a Inumerous catch. . . . . . . . - - - - - - Q. Are not the people on the southern coast of Massachusetts, and on the coast of Rhode Island, now very much engaged in catching fresh fish?—A. Very largely, taking them in pounds, and gill nets, and other modes of capture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. Is this a part of the development of the fresh fish, market?—A. Yes. Since bluefish has come back to the coast it has gonstituted an enormous element in the supply of fresh fish; it is not the controlling element, but it is, the largest single, element, although, combining the striped bass, squeteague, mullet, and scup, they considerably outnumber the bluefish, (Photographs of the fish referred to were exhibited.) Q, What about tautogº-A. It is an important fish, but is not in such immense abundance. While you talk of tautog being caught in thou- sands of pounds, you talk of others by hundreds of thousands or by millions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. Pounds are very common on the American coast?—A. It constitutes the principal mode of summer fishing from round Cape Cód as far west as Long Island. Nearly, all the fish taken on that coast are caught in the pounds. The small tunny is a fish which of late years. has come into notice, and it is believed to have disturbed the mackerel and menhaden , A.W.A.R.D.: ÖF : THE FISHERY: COMMISSION. 28:15 this year. It was never recorded:till Ifounditin 1871 in Martha's Vine. yard, where it was in enormous numbers. It is a fish weighing about 25 pounds, and, it is something like the horse mackerel, but they never grow more than 25 pounds.… Not unfrequently 500 or 1,000 of them are taken in a single night in one of the pounds, but the people make no use of them and consider them; valueless. They sell the fish weighing 25 pounds for 25 cents. It is a coarse fish and very dark meat, but still it is a food resource whenſiother fish are not taken: ; These: fish are found in the Mediterranean, where they are very much looked after and bring very good prices, they being specially Šalted and put up in oil. The Ameri- can tunny is undistinguishable from the European, though efforts have been made to separate them. . . . . ... -- . . º.º. "… . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. The pound-fishing which has come into general use in the southern part of New England; what is its effect on theisupply of fish 7–A. That is a questión which I think will require a longer ºpériod of years than weihave had for its definite determination; in 1871 I made my first in- quiries into these pounds, and satisfied myself then that they must have a positive influence tapon the abundance of fish; in view of the concurrent enormous destruction of bluefish.< ºf considered the bluefish: was the greatest agency in the destruction of our food fishes. Its relation to scup and squeteague has long been restablished—that when bluefish are abundant the other fish are rare, and the moment bluefish dimin- ishi the other, fish, become enormously common. The Squeteague in 1862 was unknown as a fish, east of the waters of New Jersey except in small numbers, and was not found in Martha's Vineyard or Buzzard's Bay. In 1872, ten years subsequently, so plentiful were they that I know myself of 5,000 fish being taken at a single haul, averaging five pounds each fish: “The bluefish then began to-diminish, and from that time were much less abundant than in 1850 or 1860. Those pounds and the bluefish; together I considered produced the decrease in the abun- dance of scup, sea bass, and tautog that has been so much complained of. I urged very strongly, and I still maintain my view, on the legisla- tures of Massachusetts and Rhode Island the propriety of exercising some sort of restrietion upon the indiscriminate use of this apparatus. I recommended that one day and two nights, that is, from Saturday night; or, if possible, from Friday night till Monday morning, should be established as a close time during which those fish should not be taken by any of those devices, thus giving the fish a chance to get into the spawning-grounds inshore, thereby securing their perpetuity. - I was quite satisfied in my own mind that unless something of this kind was done, very serious results would happen. , Very much to my disgust, I must admit, the next year, even with all the abundance of those engines, the young scup came in in quantities so great as to ex- ceed anything the oldest fisherman remembered, and thousands and tens of thousands of barrels of what was called dollar scup were seld. They were so thick in the pounds and so mixed with the fish that the owners could scarcely pick out the marketable, fish, and consequently had to let large portions of the contents of the pounds go away. Since then scup has been very much more abundant than it was when I wrote my book and report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. How do you account for this great increase?—A.. I think those were scup, belonging to further south, which took a northern trip to northern waters, and established themselves there. But I do urge in the most earnest manner the propriety of some restriction being placed on the pounds, sº I have not changed my views, although the evil has not arrived as I thought it would, and there are indications of some 2816 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. ! other agency; whether it be the diminution of the bluefish which per- mits the scup to increase or not I cannot say. Q. Is it true the bluefish is diminishing"—A. It is not by any means so abundant as it was, very much to the regret of all people who catch them, either for market or for sport. Q. Can you remember the time when there was no bluefish on the American coast?—A. I cannot. I know we have the record of the fact, and I know many persons who can remember it. Bluefish was absent from the American coast for sixty years, during which time there was not a single bluefish to be found on the coast. Q. You think the pounds should be dealt with as a matter for regu- lation and not for banishment 7–A. I don’t think the market would be amply supplied without them, and I don’t think it would be expedient to prohibit them. I think a certain amount of regulation, such as I have recommended, would be a great deal better for the fish and the fishermen. The disadvantage of the pounds is that they glut the mar- ket at times, so that there is no sale for the fish and fish are wasted, and by the adoption of a close time not only will it secure proper spawn- ing of the fish, but also equalize consumption. -: * NO. 69. WILLIAM J. MASS, of Chester, Nova Scotia, master mariner and fish- erman, called on behalf of the Government of the United States. By Mr. Foster: f Question. You are 27 years of age, I believe?—Answer. Yes. Q. And you were born at Chester, Nova Scotia?—A. Yes. Q. Your wife is residing at Dartmouth?—A. Yes. - - - Q. You command the schooner Orinoco, sailing out of Gloucester 3– A. Yes. * * - - a Q. And you are a naturalized citizen of the United States?—A. Yes. Q. To whom does the schooner belong 2—A. John-Pew. Q. Where have you been fishing this summer ?—A. I have been fish- ing in Bay St. Lawrence the latter part of the summer. Q. About what time did you go into the bay ?—A. About 20th Au- gust, I believe. - • * * - Q. When did you leave there?—A. Last Monday. . . . . Q. How many barrels of mackerel did you take in that time?—A. About 100 barrels. * Q. Sea barrels”—A. Yes. Q. Where did you catch them 3–A. At different places; some round Magdalen Islands, Prince Edward Island, and Point Miscou—all round—- Scattered. - - Q. When you went fishing to the bend of the island, how far from the shore did you get your fish?—A. As near as I could tell we were outside of the limits; that is to the best of my knowledge, but we did not measure. I should think we were outside of the three miles. Q. You have tried in and out 3–A. Yes. Q. You say you have got about 100 sea barrels; how have the schoon- ers done that you have heard of ?–A. The others have done very little. Some vessels which were in at the first part Gf the season got some mack- erel, but I don’t believe they will average 100 barrels all through, early and late. Q. If you can remember any particular schooners, and the quantities they caught, name them.—A. The William S. Baker had about 10 bar- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2817 rels. I believe she had been to the bay five weeks, but I could not tell exactly. Q. Where is she from?—A. She belongs to Gloucester; her captain is Captain Pierce. Q. Any others?—A. Capt. John Collins, in Helen M. Crosby, had 10 barrels. He had been there quite a month; I heard six weeks. He went home to Gloucester. Capt. George Bass, in the Colonel Cook, of Gloucester, had about 80 barrels, and he had been in the bay eleven weeks, I think they told me. Q. Any others?—A. The Rattler, belonging to Captain Leighton, had 150 barrels, they told me. She had been in the bay over two and a half months. Q. Have you heard of any larger catch than that of the Rattler'?—A. The John H. Kennedy, of Portland, had 90 barrels. • Q. Is that the largest catch you heard of ?—A. No ; Captain Knowles in Harvest Home had 210 barrels. That is the largest catch I know of. Then there are other vessels with 12 or 15 barrels. The Serena Ann, of Portland, had 15 barrels; the Lizzie Ann, of Portland, had 14 bar- rels. Q. I want to know whether the mackerel-fishing of vessels in the Gulf of St. Lawrence has been a success or a failure this season, so far as you know and from information given to you ?–A. Well, so far as my knowledge and information extend, it has been a failure this year— the last two years. By Mr. Davies: Q. . What is the name of your vessel ?—A. The Orinoco. Q. When did you come into the bay ?—A. We went into the bay, I believe, on the 20th or 22d August. Q. Was there much fishing around Magdalen Islands this year?—A. There has not been a great deal; there has been some mackerel there. Q. Has the fishing there not been very bad 3—A. Yes, very bad. Q. Nothing at all done there?—A. I cannot say nothing at all. One or two vessels, out of 100 sail, have got a small share there; the rest have got nothing, you may say. - Q At what would you put the whole fleet in the bay ?—A. I could not tell exactly. * Q. Would you say 250 sail altogether ?—A. No ; there were not that many this year. & Q. Could you swear there were not ?—A. I could not swear there Were Inot. Q. Had you any means of forming a correct opinion ?—A. I don’t think there were more than 100 sail. Q. Would you call it 200 sail?—A. It might be 200. Q. You cannot swear that it is more or less?—A. I could not swear. We saw lots of vessels, but I did not keep the run of them. Q. When you went into the bay, where did you first go 3–A. We tried from one place to another. - Q. Where did you go first 2—A. To Port Hood and Cape George. We tried there close inshore, and we tried out. Inshore we did not raise anything worth speaking of; we also tried off shore and got a few mack- erel. We tried two other days, and as there did not appear to be much prospect of a catch, we went from there to Point Miscou. Q. Did you try at Magdalen Islands 2—A. Yes. Q. Did you get any there ?—A. Yes. Q. How many 7–A. About 25 barrels. We stopped there about twelve days. 177 F 2818 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. A% Which was your main fishing-ground—Prince Edward Island 3– . Y. 6S. Q. Is that the main fishing-ground of the fleet this summer ?—A. I could not tell you that. There are lots of vessels in during the whole year; they had tried in other places, but most mackerel had been got at Magdalen Islands. w Q. Name one vessel that has got mackerel at Magdalen Islands 2—A. The Rambler, Captain R. Johnson, 200 barrels; he is high-liner. Q. Where did you see him 3–A. At Georgetown, two weeks ago. Q. What was he doing there 3—A. He was there for a harbor. Q. Not there fishing 2—A. He had come across from Magdalen Islands, having run short of outfit, and had to go to Canso to fit out. Q. How far is it from Georgetown to Magdalen Islands—over 100 miles 3–A. About 140. Q. Could he not be running to Georgetown to fit, after fishing at Magdalen Islands 2—A. I can tell you how he came to be there. He came from the Magdalen Islands, and was going to Canso to refit, and On the Way, there came on a breeze of wind, and he went to George- town ; he will go back to the Magdalens. Q. He got 200 barrels 2—A. Yes; about 200 barrels. R Q. You think he got them about the Magdalens 7–A. Yes; and Bird Ocks. Q. When you were fishing, how many vessels were about Prince Edward Island 2 Tell me where you were fishing 2—A. We tried up and down. We did not get a great many at the island. We got some mackerel at Port Hood—a few mackerel. Q. Did you not tell me that Prince Edward Island was your main fishing-ground 3–A. We were there most of the time, but we did not get the most mackerel there. - Q. Where did you get most of your mackerel, if not at Prince Edward Island, Magdalen Islands, or Port Hood º–A. We did not get a great many anywhere. We got most of our mackerel off Port Hood. Q. The first time you tried, you got none º–A. We went back after- Wards. - Q. When fishing off Prince Edward Island, did you fish much off East Point %—A. We fished some there. Q. You do not profess to say that you did not catch fish within the limits there ?—A. I profess to Say We did not catch many. I don’t Say we did not catch any, but that the number was very small. Q. Are you prepared to say how many; or did you pay any attention to it?—A. No ; it is pretty hard to tell exactly. Q. You did not pay any attention to it?—A. No. I think we did not catch any Worth speaking of. Q. Did you pay any particular attention to the three-mile limit 3–A. A man who has business on hand knows where he has done best, and calculates on going there again. If he does well at one place he always bears it in mind to go there again. w Q. Did you pay any particular attention to how far you were from land when you caught your fish 3–A. I took notice always When We tried for mackerel, we tried for mackerel inshore and then Out. Q. You went wherever you thought you could find mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. This year you went in and out irrespective of the limit?—A. Yes. Q. Did you see boats fishing much there 3—A. We saw Some boats out in the bend of the island; a good many mackerel boats were there. We did not try much there. We went more round the Chapels, AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2819 Q. That is where you fished chiefly 3–A. We were round there at different times, but we did not get many of our mackerel there. Some vessels got mackerel there. - Q. You got mackerel off Port Hood 2–A. Yes; a good part of them. Q. You do not wish the Commission to understand that the low Catches of vessels you have named are average catches 3–A.. I gave you the highest and the lowest catch. - Q. Those are the lowest catches made in the fleet 7–A. They could not well have any and have less. Q. You do not wish the Commission to understand that they were anything like the average catch 7–A.. I said that, so far as my knowl- edge goes, they would not average over 100 barrels for the whole season. Q. Have you asked the captains of many vessels what their catches have been 3–A. Yes; we always found that out. Q. What is your own catch 7–A. It is about 100 barrels. Q. Cannot you tell me exactly 7–A. I could not tell you exactly; it is allowed to be about 100 barrels. Q. Do you know what the catch of the Greyhound was 2 She is re- ported to me as having caught 230 barrels. Is that correct º–A. What I heard was that she had 170. Q. Did you hears that from the captain himself"—A.. I never spoke with him. Q. When did you hear that ?—A. Two weeks ago. Q. She might have caught up to that number after that 2–A. No. Q. Did you hear it from the captain himself —A. I did not speak with the captain himself, but with the other men. Q. Your information, then, is third-hand 3—A.. I did not get it from him, but I got it pretty straight. Q. Do you know what the Moses Adams got ?—A. I could not tell ex- actly. The captain was on board of my vessel, but I never inquired. Q. He is reported to have got 270 barrels 2—A.. I guess you will have to take a good many off that. Q. What did they tell you the Moses Adams had got ?—A. One hun- dred and seventy barrels. * Q. When was that ?—A. Just before he went home. He went home two or three days after that, so I was told. I know he did not catch any. I know that from a vessel which spoke with him as he was going home, and he was bearing up for the Strait of Canso. r Q. Do you know when he got to Canso?—A. I know pretty nearly. Q. How do you know, if you were not there? Might he not have got some at Margaree?—A. The vessel saw him going by Port Hood ; that is away this side of Margaree. \ - Q. Do you know what the E. H. EIorton got?—A. I don’t know any more than what I heard. ^s & Q. What did you hear?—A. One hundred and sixty barrels. Q. How was it you did not give the names of those vessels as being among those in the bay ?—A. I could not think of all. - Q. Do you know how many the John Gerard, of Newbury port, Caught 7–A.. I did not talk with her captain, but they said she had 150 barrels. The Old Chad, of Newburyport, with nineteen hands—I know this positively—got 120 barrels. Q. Do you know what the J. J. Clarke got ?—A. I. don’t know ex- 㺠You have got all the best there; there is not a poor one among them. Q. Do you know what the Cayenne got?—A. Is she an American vessel ? **, 2820 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. I presume so. —A. I never saw her; I don’t know a vessel of that Tl2,IIl Cº. - Q. Do you know what the Frederick Gering, jr., got? She is reported with 330 barrels.-A. Then they have got a big spurt. f Q. You never heard of her ?—A. Yes, I did; I heard she had 150 barrels. - Q. When did you hear that ?—A. I should judge about two weeks ago. Q. Were all of those vessels in the bay two weeks ago?—A. I did not see the vessels, but I have talked with the men. Q. How many vessels were there in the bay when you left 7–A. There were about 35 sail of vessels with us when we went out of Canso. Q. How many did you leave when you came away ?—A. I could not tell. - Q. Thirty-five or forty vessels?—A. I should estimate over that, but that number is of those we saw there. Q. Do you know what the David F. Low got %–A. I could not tell positively; I have heard reports. Q. How many seasons have you been in the bay ?—A. About seven- teen SeaSOnS. Q. As master 2—A. No. - Q. As hand 3–A. As hand, except this last year, when I was in the bay as master. Q. You must have been fishing in the bay ever since you went into the bay at all 7–A. All but two seasons. Q. Where did you fish then 3–A. On the American shore; on George's, La Have, and Grand Banks, two years; I was master. Q. What years were they 3–A. Last year and the year before. Q. During the years you fished in the bay, you fished both inside and outside the limits 3–A. We tried all over. Q. Inside and outside 3–A. To the best of my knowledge we caught most of the mackerel off shore. Q. You think you did 3–A. I am positive of it; all the largest spurts. I have caught as high as 130 barrels with hooks off shore. We caught them about nine miles off Entry Island, to the southeast; we got 130 barrels from nine o'clock in the morning till half past four o'clock in the afternoon. - Q. Have you fished much about Margaree?—A. Yes; a great deal round Margaree. # Q. I believe in the fall nearly all the vessels fish there ?—A. They used to do so years ago; these last years there does not seem to have been anything round there. - g Q. What years do you speak of ?—A. This year and last year. My brother was down in the bay last year, and he told me about it then. Q. This year you did not fish about Margaree much 3–A. We trie there, but did not take more than half a barrel. x Q. That is known as one of the best fishing-grounds in the fall 3–A. It used to be counted the best. Q. Up to the last two years?—A. It was when I was in the bay ; that is, in the fall. -- Q. Most of the fleet went to fish there in the fall 7–A. There was a large part which did not fish there. I used to be in Nova Scotia ves- sels, and during the largest part of that time we saw very few Ameri. can vessels. - Q. At the time when you catch them inshore it always happens you are in provincial vessels 2—A. It is not that at all. Most of the vessels would not content themselves staying in ; they would go away before | AWARD OF THE EISHERY COMMISSION. 2821 the spurts would come at Margaree and Cheticamp, and we used to stop in. I was with my father, who owned a vessel called the Frank, which Sailed for Halifax. We filled up two or three falls around Margaree. Very few American vessels were there. - Q. What time was that ?—A. We caught 200 barrels, about 5th No- vember; I don’t judge we were inside the three miles then. By Mr. Foster: Q. How old were you when you first went into the bay ?—A. Eight years. Q. You were with your father ?—A. Yes; my first trip was in the Frank. Q. When you fish round Margaree late in the autumn, how long do you stay—one week or two º–A. Sometimes one week, sometimes two. Sometimes we have to lay there ten or twelve days and cannot get out. Then perhaps one or two fine days, will come, and we will get some mackerel. ſ FRIDAY, October 19, 1877. The Conference met. - The examination of Prof. SPENCER. F. BAIRD, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, resumed. By Mr. Dana : Question. There were some matters with regard to herring, in regard to which I did not ask you fully yesterday. Will you state to the Com- mission about the spawning-grounds of herring especially? I do not care for anything outside of the American coast.—Answer. The herring spawn along the whole coast of the United States, from the Bay of Fundy to No Man's Land, which is a small island between Block Island and Martha's Vineyard. I have specimens of spawn from almost all the localities between those two points, and I am informed they also spawn around Block Island, but I have never seen any evidence myself. Q. But you know as to the fact º–A. I know it is so from testimony and reports. - Q. Do the eggs of the herring lodge on the bottom 3–A. The herring is almost the One—is, I think, the only one—of our important Sea fish, the eggs of which are adherent; that is to say, when discharged, it falls to the bottom and adheres to the sea-weed, gravel, and rock. Generally it is scattered, but not unfrequently a great part of the spawn of the fish will be aggregated into a mass of the size of a walnut or hickory nut, but more generally they are scattered and attached singly or by twos and threes to sea-weed. I have here specimens of the eggs in the adherent form, some which I dragged up at the southern end of Grand Manan. - Q. Are the spawning-grounds extended along the coast all the way? —A. Yes; all the way. Q. And are very numerous 2—A..There is no reason to suppose there is any part of the coast at which they are wanting. They are specially abundant about Cutler, in Maine, and about some of the islands off Pe- nobscot Bay, about Cape Elizabeth, Portsmouth, off Newburyport, and particularly along the edge of the coast from north and east of the en- trance of Massachusetts Bay. They also spawn inside of Cape Cod Bay, and all along the south coast of this region to No Man's Land, as I have already mentioned. The spawning-season is later and later as you go south. On the coast of the United States the herring spawns On the fall of the temperature, just as the salmon, cod, and trout do— 2822 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. unlike the shad and mackerel, which spawn at a rising temperature. The moment the water along our coast gets to a certain degree of tem- perature, then the herring is incited to the act of spawning. I might. say in completion of this point that herring spawns in the Spring in Bay St. Lawrence and Newfoundland. It spawns in early summer at Grand Manan, in July, August, and September. It spawns at the end of Sep- tember in Eastern Maine, and it spawns in October off Boston, and does not spawn till November and sometimes December at No Man's Land. Q. Making a difference of many months?—A. Yes, a difference of from six to eight months. i Q. Describe the modes by which herring are caught on the coast of the United States.—A. They are caught principally by Weirs, pounds, and gill-nets on our coast. They are caught with Seines largely in Bay St. Lawrence and Newfoundland, but the large, full-grown, spawning herring are usually taken in gill-nets on or near the spawning-ground. A very large number are taken on the whole coast of Maine and in the Bay of Fundy in weirs, but the great body of these are smaller herring, and are not used as fresh fish. * Q. How is it with weir fishing 2—A. The weir fishing is generally conducted in Maine, and to some extent inside of Cape Cod to the north. South of Cape Cod they are more generally taken in pounds, but also in gill-nets. Q. How are they taken along the Massachusetts coast 3–A. They are taken, generally, in gill-nets in the fall. The regular pounds are usually not down as late as the herring season, but in spring large num- bers are taken in the pounds. Q. How do you feel sure that this statement about spawning on the coast is correct 7–A. By actual capture of the fish in the Spawning season, and by dredging up their eggs from the bottom with apparatus. We use for such purposes. - Q. Is herring a very common fish on the United States coast 2—A. It is exceedingly abundant. It is not utilized at all to the extent of the capacity. The herring is not a very favorite fish, it is a cheap fish, and as there are so many better fish on the coast it is not very marketable for food. It is sold in great quantities but at very low prices, and is used only by the poorer classes of the community. Of course it is used for bait, but as fresh fish it is very seldom seen on the tables of the well- to-do people. i # t - t Q. Is it dried and pickled?—A. They are pickled to some extent. Some are smoked, a great many are worked up in the form of bloaters, and in this form it is very much sought after. Q. You have been at the places where the business is carried on 3– A. I have seen 20 or 30 large boats, of a capacity of perhaps 500 barrels or more, filled with herring, lying at the wharf at Boston at one time. They are boats probably from 4 to 10 tons. * * Q. Market boats?—A. They are open boats, known as herring boats, and the coast now is lined with the boats with gill-nets catching herring for the fall trade. + * Q. Have you anything to say about the predaceous fish, such as the shark and dogfish & Do you think they do a great deal of harm to the food-fish 3–A. They constitute a very important factor in the question of the abundance of fish on our coast. They destroy enormous weights and quantities of all the useful fish, and in proportion as they increase in numbers the food-fish diminish and vice versa. They perform the same function as bluefish ; they are constantly in the pursuit of other fish and destroying them. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2823 Q. There is no probability of changing that relation which fish seem to bear to one another ?—A. They all have the relation of attack, defense, pursuit, and flight. - Q. But, notwithstanding that, I suppose they belong to what you call the balance of nature ?—A. The balances of nature are such that it is extremely difficult-to say what will be the effect on the fisheries of de- stroying or multiplying a particular stock of fish. The sharks, for in- stance, are destroying great quantities of food-fish. A new enterprise has just been started, and will be opened in the course of a few weeks, to utilize the sharks, porpoises, dogfish, and tunnies. An establishment expects to work up twelve million pounds annually of those fish, for which heretofore there has not been a market. They are caught in great Quantities on the shores, but not utilized, and now there is to be a mar- ket for them, and the parties offer the same price for them as they do for menhaden. - Q. Where is the company started ?–A. At Wood's Holl, Mass. The Company expects to keep two or three steamers constantly traversing the coast from Block Island to Penobscot Bay, or Bay of Fundy, and the company advertises that it will take all dogfish, sharks, porpoises, black- fish, and other offal that may be offered to it, up to the amount, I think, of 20 or 25 tons a day. By a new process, the oil will be extracted with- out heat, leaving the meat entirely free of grease, and, when it is dried, it will be ground up to make what they call fish flour, or meal, which can be used for fertilizing purposes or food, as you please. The same substance is made from cod in Norway and is an article of food. It makes a very nice form of food, and is used as fish-cakes and other prep- arations. Q. It can be made up like flour"—A. Yes; and can be mixed up with- out any difficulty. The effect of the abstraction of twelve million pounds of those predaceous fish will undoubtedly be very great. Whether, as those fish eat bluefish, it may not allow bluefish to multiply, and in that way restore the balance again, it is impossible to say; but if it was to take bluefish also, we would relax very largely the pressure on eatable fish, and they would necessarily increase, Q. Is the philosophy of that substantially that when one kind of predaceous fish becomes veryºnumerous, and is destroying useful fish, it either disappears in time, or by what we regard as the regular course of nature, and the work of man, that fish diminishes, or is exterminated, and others take its place”—A. After they have eaten up everything, they will start out and go somewhere else. Whenever they have made their favorite food scarce, they go somewhere else. So it is a very Seri- ous question as to what had better be done, no matter what promise there may be, in regard to altering the relations willfully and purposely between the different forms of the animals of the sea. If you take them for food, you allow the consequences to come as they may, but any ques- tion of protecting one kind of fish, or destroying or exterminating others, should always be considered with a great deal of care, and from a great many points of view that do not strike the mind or attention at first thought. Q. To undertake to regulate the relations of fish beyond shoal water where you can fish with nets, seines, and pounds, would be impracti. cable %–A. It would be very difficult, indeed, and the effect would prob- ably be very trifling. Q. You spoke yesterday of the fish of the Southern States, the fish- eries of which in the new order of things are being rather more de- veloped by greater diversity of industry, and so forth ; can you mention 2824 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. any other fish that are coming into use 3—A. There are a great many species, probably not less than fifty, all having a definite value as an article of food, and all caught and consumed on the coast, or sent in limited quantities either to the Northern markets or to Cuba, that could be taken into consideration, but perhaps the capture of the fish that takes the rank of fisheries relates more particularly to the mullet, menhaden, striped bass, and bluefish. There is a very extensive fishery of blue- fish on the southern coast. The bluefish, after leaving the northern waters, spends a certain time on the coast of Virginia and North Caro- lina, and by the time it gets back there it has attained enormous dimen- sions, the fishes being generally from 12 to 15 pounds, at which size they are found only casually and occasionally on the northern coast. It is not at all an uncommon thing for one fishery of a single locality to take 3,000 bluefish, averaging 12 pounds each fish. - Q. What do you mean by one fishery 3–A. A single station at one particular point, the fishing being controlled by one man or firm. An enormous number of bluefish are sent late in fall and in early winter to the Northern markets. Q. So that when ‘bluefish leave the New England coast, they do not disappear altogether from the American coast 3—A. Not at all. It dis- appears some time in February, and where it goes, we cannot tell. Q. It disappears from the Southern coast 3—A. Yes. A small School of bluefish is found all the year south to Florida, but the large school of blue fish usually disappears in February, and, indeed, I may say, we never see it again. The fish, as they make their appearance in spring, are Smaller fish. f e Q. Do they first appear on the south coast of New England 2–A. On first appearing on the coast of Carolina and Virginia, they come in Something like the mackerel, only they have a rather more coastwise travel, because they do not spawn on the northern coast. Probably the big bluefish go out somewhere to spawn, but what becomes of them, whether they spawn themselves out to a condition of nonentity, I cannot say. We do not see them; they may go to Africa, or the Mauritius, for bluefish are found all the world over; but whether they go to any other portion of the world from the United States, I cannot say. Q. What have you to tell the Commission about menhaden at the South 3—A. The menhaden is a very important fish on the south coast as an article of food. It is caught, salted, and pickled, and to some ex- tent used in the country. There is quite a large export of menhaden to the West Indies from the Southern States. a' Q. Is it used fresh 7–A. It is salted and pickled ; it is also eaten fresh very largely, and considered a very capital article of food. Q. You have eaten it yourself?—A. Yes; it is a sweet fish, quite as good as herring, but rather moré bony; the bones are, however, more adherent to the skeleton. You can prepare menhaden by maceration, so that the greater part of the bones will stick to the vertebral column, instead of being loose and lying about the muscular parts, as in herrings. Q. Is it also salted in the South º–A. Yes. - Q. Is there now a large business in menhaden, or is there likely to be 3—A. It is a business capable of almost any extension for which there is a demand. There is no limit apparently, speaking in reasonable terms, to the number that can be taken, any more than there is in the North. There is nothing like the same quantity taken in the Southern as in the Northern waters. It is taken Somewhat for the manufacture of oil, but the business is not fully developed. Q. What other fish did you mention in the South º–A. The mullet, Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2825 menhaden, bluefish, and striped bass to some extent, but striped bass is more an estuary fish coming into brackish waters, and can scarcely, With propriety, be mentioned in this connection. Q. What have you to say about the drum ?—A. It is a fish that can be taken in almost any desired quantity. It is obtained weighing up to 100 to 120 pounds, but it generally weighs from 10 to 20 pounds. There is the channel bass, which can be also taken in any desired quantities. It is entirely a sea fish, and is caught in the rapid channel-ways between the shores and islands on the coast. Q. Especially, perhaps, in South Carolina 7–A. Only stragglers come On the eastern coast, but it is found in enormous abundance from North Carolina down to the southern extremity of Florida, and in the Gulf of Mexico. - Q. Can the fish be salted for the market 2—A. I don’t think it has ever been tried; it is worth almost too much as fresh fish. Q. Is the fish called red snapper there?—A. Yes; it is very abundant on the coast of Florida. It is a large fish, of a blood-red color, as red as goldfish, and weighs from five to twenty pounds. It is caught in great numbers in the winter season, and taken alive to Cuba. The Con- necticut fishermen, after they have finished their halibut and cod sum- mer and autumn fishing, go down to Florida, and spend two or three months catching red snappers and other fish and taking them to Cuba, Selling them as fresh fish, alive. It is taken in the wells of vessels, and is sold at very high prices in Eſavana. Sometimes, on the return trip, , they take a load to New York, and sell them in that market alive. Q. In regard to pounds, they must be constructed in muddy ground 3– A. In almost any ground, except sand, because the sand shifts. Q. To construct a pound, you drive in piles or posts, and then make a straight line of net-work right up 7–A. Yes. (Diagram of a pound exhibited.) The stakes are driven right down with a pile-driver, and from stake to stake is extended a wall of netting, which extends down to the botton and makes a barrier for the fish. They are held down by a chain. There is also the heart, bowl and pocket. The fish coming along the coast strike the wall of netting, and very naturally, in endeavoring to skirt it, they turn seaward and go along till they get into this recep- tacle either way. A fish never turns a corner, and when it gets within the netting it swims round and round, but never goes back again. Then gradually it is led into the inner inclosure, and the same process goes on ; the fish swim round and round, but never find their way out back through the opening. You may leave the pound for a week, and you Will have there all the fish that have come in, except the striped bass, Which is the only fish you cannot cheat in a pound; and you very rarely take them in that way. Then when they come to haul the pounds, they throw a gate of netting across the opening, and in the bowl the netting extends over the bottom and comes up the side. They gather up the end and haul it over the boat, and gradually concentrate the fish in a corner, and turn them or throw them over into the permanent pocket, where the fish are kept until ready for market. Fish are kept there sometimes two or three weeks or more for a demand in the market ; if there is a glut in the market, they may keep perhaps 1,000, 2,000 or 3,000 fish in one of these inclosures. Q. How is the pocket formed ?–A. It is a net-work, fastened down to the bottom by a chain, so that it will touch the bottom and not permit fish to go under it. (Diagram of trap exhibited.) The trap is only used in the waters of Rhode Island, and is used for scup, tautog, and sea-bass. There are no stakes used to the trap. It is a rectangular space of net- 2826 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. ting, held at the corners by anchors. The fish go along the leaders and pass into the receptacle. The trap requires constant watching, or the fish could go in and out. The moment a school of fish enter, the net- ting at the end is raised. They pursue the same mode of emptying, and turn the fish into the pocket, as with pounds. # Q. The difference is that in the case of pound, it is not necessary that boats should be employed to visit them frequently 7–A. In stormy weather you sometimes cannot get to a pound for a week. In the case of traps they are visited three or four or half a dozen times a day. Q. When the boats off shore see a school of fish enter the trap, they follow and take it whether large or small. [Diagram of weir exhibited.] This weir consists of a small circle of brush or boards, with two wings and a spring. The fish come into the weir at high tide, and as the Water falls they are left in a cavity, inside the weir, and are taken out in dip- nets. There are a dozen or twenty different forms of constructing weirs. Q. What is the estimated cost of a pound 3–A. $1,000 will pay for the construction of a very good pound, including the entire equipment. A pound is managed by from two to four men, while a trap requires two boats and about seven men. † Q. The trap is more expensive 3–A. About the same cost as the pound, because, although it has no stakes, yet it requires to be of very considerable size and needs anchors. I should presume that the first cost of the two would not be very different. Q. And what is the cost of a weir 2—A. It is a simple thing. The Cost merely represents the lumber and labor. Q. That is a permanent erection ?—A. Yes; the others are all taken up ; the traps are only kept down six weeks in the year; the pounds are down for from two months to five, and at the end of the season they use an apparatus to pull the stakes out of the water, and then pack them on shore for next season. §t r - Q. What are the kinds of fish taken in the great lakes 2—A. There is a great variety of fish taken there, but the most important fish, as a matter of business, are the whitefish, lake herring, lake trout, wall-eyed pike, maskalonge, sturgeon, and a variety of others. The most import- ant, however, are whitefish, herring, and trout. - Q. What are the methods of taking them 3–A. They are taken very largely by pounds, which are constructed on a very large scale, and much more elaborate and expensive than on the coast. They are taken by gill nets very largely, and by seines under certain circumstances. At a certain time of the year, whitefish can be taken in great quantities in Seines, and kept in pounds until ready for market. Q. Are those built and constructed to a great extent along both the Canadian and American shores –A.. I presume they are used in Canada, though I cannot say. I know tuey are on our own coasts. There is Quite a number of these pounds worked by Canadians on the American. COaSt. - - Q. Have you any statistics respecting the lake fishery for the years 1876 and 1877 ?—A. I have only partial statistic for 1877. I published the statistics in detail in my report for 1872, and I am now having Statistics for 1877 collected, and will have them I suppose by the end of the season. * Q. 1872 represents but faintly the present state of things. Can you tell us how it was in 1872?—A. In 1872 the American production of fish in the great lakes was 32,250,000 pounds. That quantity of fish was taken, but how much more I cannot say. Those were marketed at Buffalo, Cleveland, Chicago, and many other stations. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2827 Q. Does that include the Canadian catch 3–A. I presume there is no Canadian catch in that amount. Those are the figures as they were ob- tained by my agents, from the fishermen and dealers. Q. You obtained them from the dealers in the large cities 3–A. Yes, and the fishermen at the grounds. This year I have had every station on the American side of the lakes visited and canvassed. Q. You have steady communication with and reports from the deal- ers?—A. I have reports only when I send specially after them, as I did in 1872 and am doing this year. Q. How far have you got in your inquiry this year?—A. I have onl a partial return from Chicago. - *. Q. What does that show %–A. The total marketing of salted fish in Chicago up to the middle of October amounted to 100,000 half-barrels, with about 20,000 half-barrels expected for the rest of the season, or equal to 60,000 barrels of those fish for Chicago alone for the present year. The corresponding supply of barrels of fish in 1872 was 12,600 in Chicago, so that the Chicago trade has increased from 12,600 in 1872 to 60,000 in 1877, or almost fivefold—4 8-10. The total catch of fish in the lakes in 1872 was 32,250,000 pounds. If the total catch has increased in the same ratio as that market has done at Chicago, it will give 156,000,000 pounds of fish taken on the American side of the lakes for the present year. - Q. That, of course, cannot be a matter of certainty º–A. No. Q. What other large central markets for lake fish are there besides Chicago 2–A. Chicago and Buffalo are the most important. Cleveland takes a large quantity, but Chicago and Buffalo control the market. Detroit takes the fish to some extent, but it is not such a convenient Shipping point. - Q. What proportion does that bear to the fish of Canada. ?—A.. I can- not say. I may say, in regard to this point, that on the same ratio the total product of the salt fish from the lakes in the American market would be 48,546,000 pounds. Of course, those figures are comparisons, and the estimates may be fallacious. Chicago may have a larger share of the lake trade in proportion, or may have a smaller share; other places may have crowded on it, or it may have gained on them. - Q. You expect to have full returns?—A. I shall have them probably in the course of one month. I have not heard from my agent who is visiting all the Canadian stations and fishing points on the American COaSt.S. Q. You expect to ascertain the whole catch of the lakes for 1877?— A. Yes, with great precision. I have here an item which may perhaps be interesting in regard to the price of those fish. The ruling prices of fish on the 15th October, in Chicago, were $7.50 per barrel for white- fish, $5.50 for salmon trout, and $3.75 for lake herring. Those are the prices paid to the captors for the fish by the merchants; that is, before they are handled and any profit put upon them. Q. In regard to the increase in the consumption of fish, are any as beneficial means being adopted in Canada to maintain the supply 3–A. both Canada and the States bordering on the great. lakes have striven very efficiently to prevent what would otherwise have been a great danger to the supply of an enormous amount of fish. They are hatch- ing white-fish by artificial means to the extent of a great many millions annually. The two countries are not co-operating but concurring in this business, and probably this year they may introduce as many as 20, 30, or more millions of young fish into the waters, and that must necessarily have a very important influence on the maintenance of the fisheries. 2828 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. They have not done anything yet in regard to lake herring, but white- fish, which is a much more valuable fish, is being carefully guarded. Q. What States of the American Union are engaged in the breeding of whitefish 3–A. Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Q. What has been the success generally of the fish-breeding system by artificial means ?—A. It is now being practiced to such an extent in Canada and the United States as to show it is a very efficient mode of preventing the diminution of fish, and even of increasing the supply. It has passed the region of experiment, and it is a positive fact as shown by the large appropriations made on both sides of the border for this purpose. It commands the respect and consideration of men of all part- ies, and in our own country, at least, there is no difficulty in getting all appropriations that can profitably be expended to secure thé result. Q. It extends not only to the fish of the great lakes, but to river fish 3–A. To salmon, shad, striped bass, and alewives. Q. You find as the result that a much larger proportion of the eggs are turned into fish than when left to natural exposures and dangers ?— A. An ordinary estimate in regard to shad is that under natural spawn- ing 995 out of 1,000 eggs perish without producing a young fish able to feed for itself, and that you get five young fish which reach the stage of ability to feed for themselves; that is, after their fins are properly formed, and the fish is three-eighths of an inch in length. They haye then passed the ordinary perils of infancy, and are able to take care of themselves. With artificial spawning, a fish culturist who could not bring out 950 of 1,000 eggs to that state would be considered as ignorant of his business, except some unusual circumstance that could not be controlled should come in to interfere. Q. Can you tell the Commission how many traps and pounds there are in the southern part of New England, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts, at Martha's Vineyard, and all along to Cape Cod 3–A. There are 22 traps on the south side of Cape Cod, in the bays and basins about Chatham, 9 in Vineyard Sound, 30 at Buzzard's Bay, 3 at Block Island, 30 in Narraganset Bay. This year there have been 94 traps and pounds on the southern coast of Rhode Island and Massachusetts, exclusive of Connecticut. I have not the figures for Connecticut here. This number represents the traps and pounds from Narraganset Bay to the eastern end of Cape Cod. - Q. Have they been increasing 3–A. Yes; they are ve, y measurably greater in number than they were when I made my first census. Q. Can you state the number of men who are employed on those traps ?—A. The number of men required to man the traps is 436, the traps requiring seven men each, taking 301. ..Q. Your agent would know each of those traps?—A. I have the name of the owner, and the catch of the greater portion of them. Q. Can you tell the Commission the catch of those traps and pounds? —A. I have here a table of the yield of that number of pounds in 1876. Q. Give the result.—A. For some of the species, the figures are very accurate, and for others they are estimated to some extent, but this estimate is essentially a record of the year, so far as they have reported it themselves, corrected by the personal observation of one at least of my men, who has taken a standard pound, and meted it every day him- self, and enumerated the catch and the kinds of fish. The total catch for 1876 included flounders, tautog, mackerel, Spanish mackerel, pom- peno, butter fish, squiteagle, scup, sea-bass, striped bass, bluefish, menblades, eels, cod, alewives, and herring. The total catch for the year was 34,274,350 pounds. That is from Narragansett Bay to the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2829 eastern end of Cape Cod, on the south coast of Massachusetts and Rhode Island only. sº * Z - Q. Not the western part of Rhode Island 2–A. It includes the whole of Narraganset Bay. It does not include Long Island, where there are a great many pounds, or the most westerly part of Rhode Island. Q. Are all these pounds of fish capable of being used, and are used for food?—A. There is a large catch of menbaden in that 15 millions. Q. How many miles of coast-line does that catch represent 3–A. About 250 miles of coast-line. -> Q. Have you made up a calculation of the ratio of the catch per mile ! —A. I have the ratio of 137,097 pounds of fish to the line or mile. Q. And to the men º–A. The ratio of the catch is 78,610 to each man. The total value of the weir catch at the lowest wholesale rate is $847,900; at the lowest retail rate, $1,472,438; at a mean rate between the two, which perhaps more exactly represents the value, $1,160,168. That, however, is the catch of that region only with traps and pounds; there is also a very large catch with hand-lines, gill-nets and Seines. This is but for 94 weirs and traps. The aggregate catch of the entire fishery on the south coast of Rhode Island and Massachusetts is 45,917,750 pounds, of the mean value of $1,875,840, which gives a ratio of 133,671 pounds per linear mile, and equivalent to $7,504 to the linear mile. The yield in the trap and pound fishery is over 78,610 pounds to the man, of a money value of $2,661, being the product of each man's labor for an average not exceeding four months. That sum, to bring it to the annual amount, will have to be multiplied by three; each man thus would pro- duce $8,000 worth a year by this mode of fishing. Q. You do not mean to say that each man makes that amount 7–A. No ; but that is the ratio of fish to the man. Those pounds are gener- ally owned by at least one of the men who run them, who sometimes hire what additional assistance they require; perhaps, however, in half of the cases the owners manage the pounds and have no division of profits. Q. Those statistics were prepared to show the amount of the fish, in- cluding the fresh fish as well as those salted ?–A. None of these are salted except such of the salted menhaden as is for food. They do not enter into the returns of pickled fish. These fresh fish go almost exclu- sively to New York, very few to Boston. - Q. It seems strange that you should be able to know the amount of fresh fish that passes into the great city and what is caught every day. What method have you adopted to ascertain those facts”— A. The entire fresh-fish trade of New York is confined to nineteen firms which form the Wholesale Dealers' Association, to whose books and figures I have had access through and by the assistance of the large and retail dealer in New York, Mr. Blackford, who has taken great interest in my inves- tigations and is a very hearty coadjutor. He has succeeded in interest- ing those dealers, and I have just prepared a series of blanks in which I hope to have the dealers record all the catches of fish every day and give me the returns. Q. You have no doubt from your relations with the dealers who con- trol the market that you know substantially the catch 3—A. I cannot say; I know the maximum catch on the coast, but I know I have reason to rely upon the figures of the fish that is actually marketed and comes into the hands of the wholesale men. Q. A large amount escapes notice º–A. Yes; all the local catch, the catch of fishermen which goes for their own benefit and is consumed on 2830 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. the spot; the catch consumed in seaport towns and villages cannot be in- cluded in this enumeration. . $3 Q. Are these caught within the treaty limits 2—A. All those fish which I have mentioned are caught east of Cape May. Q. Northeast?—A. Yes; and all caught close to the shore, by traps or pounds, usually within 100 to 300 yards of the shore, or by gill-nets and hand-lines, used by men also from the shore. e Q. The whole fishery, with pounds and nets, that goes on from the shore, and with hook and line for market fish, all comes within the treaty limits 2—A. Yes, of course, the mullet and winter bluefish are south of the treaty limits; but all the fish are practically within the treaty limits. Q. And in those fisheries the Canadians have the same rights as Amer- icans ?—A. The Canadians have the same rights there as we have. It does not include the fishery, not of Cape Cod Bay and round to East: port. - - Q. Can you make any comparison of the corresponding ratio per mile or otherwise of the Canadian fisheries?—A. I do not think I could, be- cause I believe the returns of the Canadian fisheries are not so large as they should be. I do not believe the Canadian returns are in proportion to the actual catch. I therefore think a comparative statement would be fallacious, and I would rather not make it. Q. Some Canada tables have been published of the fisheries of 1876, including, perhaps, cod and herring 2—A. Those relate to all the fish- eries. This estimate I submit is for weir-fishing on a limited coast. Q. The Canadian returns show a total amount of $11,000,000 —A. I think the total estimate of the Canadian fisheries for 1876 is between $11,000,000 and $12,000,000. . Q. If you put that of the United States at $50,000,000, would that be a low or high estimate %–A. I think we could figure up over $40,000,000 without any difficulty; that is, for all the fisheries. Q. Including the lake fisheries 3–A. Including hake, ring, and shell- fish. Our oyster fisheries are worth $30,000,000 a year. Q. That is nearly double the entire Canadian return ?—A. Perhaps. There are $3,000,000 worth of oysters put in cans in Baltimore yearly. Q. They are all included in the Canadian returns 3–A. I think so. Those industries with them are not so important as ours. Our off shore codfish, lake and river, shad, salmon, herring, lobster, crab, oyster, and clam fisheries are included. Q. Now, with reasonable legislation to limit certain methods of fishing, is there in your judgment any danger of the existence of the inshore, coast, and lake fisheries?—A. I think that the lake fisheries would have been exhausted and greatly destroyed in a comparatively limited num- ber of years but for the timely warning taken by Canada and the United States and the measures initiated in both countries for increasing the Supply. Q. You yourself have been very much engaged on the subject of the propagation of fish 7–A. Not so much in the lakes directly as in the TIVETS. sº Q. You have shipped some of your fish by rail to California?—A. Yes. Q. I remember reading an account of one of your large collections for California being lodged in one of the rivers by a bridge breaking down, for which collection the State has never paid 7–-A. Yes, a car of live fish which was being sent to California. Q. In order to get some idea of the manipulation practiced in the breed- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2831 ing establishments, perhaps you will state whether steam machinery is not now used?—A. That is a device we have adopted this year for the first time in hatching shad, in which, instead of depending on the nat- ural current of the river usually employed, we make the trays filled with Spawn move up and down in the water in a continuous alternation, and in that way hatching millions of eggs where formerly we could only hatch thousands. Q. You can state a case showing the result of one year's experiment 3– A. We had eleven millions of shad in Susquehanna River in about three Weeks in May and June. Q. Can you state to the Commission the result of some fish operations at Potomac River ?—A. The instance to which you refer is that of black bass. The black bass is not indigenous to the Potomac River, and none were in it. About two years ago half a dozen adult fish were placed in the river, and it might now be said that the Potomac, with the excep- tion of St. John's River, Florida, is the most prolific in black bass of any stream in the United States. Over an extent of one hundred miles, the fishing for black bass both for market and sport is unrivaled anywhere. Q. Without claiming too much for our people, are not the ingenuity and industry of the American people in taking fish for consumption and Other uses on the one hand, and in propagating them on the other, very great and very remarkable % Eſow is that ?—A. The methods of fish culture as practiced in the United States, and in Canada, so far as they cover the same ground, are, we think, better than those anywhere in the Old World, and both countries hatch fish by millions where thousands are considered a large performance in Europe. The United States have a single establishment in California at which more eggs are obtained than are gathered by all European hatcheries put together. This year We have taken about six million eggs, and we have taken as many as eight millions in a year. We have an establishment now on Columbia River where we expect to hatch twenty millions of eggs. Three millions of eggs, I may say, in illustration of magnitude, would fill a hay-field cart to its utmost capacity. . Q. You have an estimate of the combined fishing of the United States for the year 1876, including the Bank fishing?—A. Yes. This is a table of the product of the marine fisheries of the United States east of Cape May within the treaty limits. The total product of the inshore fisheries of that range, the fish taken by boats from the shore, that taken by seines, by traps, pounds, &c., amounts to 319,579,950 pounds, of a mean value of $4,064,484. The total fisheries of the United States, inshore and off shore within the limits, amount to 1,045,855,750 pounds, of the value of $13,030,821. This is exclusive of any of the Southern fisheries, exclu- Sive of the lake fishery, of the whale, porpoise, and seal fishery, and of the salmon, shad, and herring fishery. By Sir Alexander Galt : - Q. Does it include the Grand Bank fishery and that at Georges?—A. Yes. By Mr. Dana : Q. It is exclusive entirely of the fresh-water fish of the lakes and rivers, shad, herring, and salmon, of the whale and fur seal, of the oys- ters, lobsters, and crabs. The total coast line on which the fisheries are pursued is 1,112 miles, from Cape May to Eastport, including the islands. The ratio to the mile is 940,510 pounds, the ratio of value is $11,718. Q. Will you state how the returns are obtained ?—A. The figures in regard to the herring, cod, and mackerel are obtained from the reports 2832 . AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. of the Bureau of Statistics of the United States for 1876, the other fig- ures are made up from a series of tables for each kind of fish. I had an estimate prepared of the production of each fishery, and those figures have been obtained partly from witnesses who have been here to testify, partly from the books of dealers in Gloucester, Boston, Newburyport, and elsewhere, partly and very largely from the returns I have gathered through agents I have sent out, and from circulars I have distributed. I have here an enumeration of all the different kinds of fish and quan- tity caught; it is simply a combined table from a great many sub-tables. Q. These tables you will put into the case ?—A. The tables were not made up by me, but under my direction. They are put in by the com- piler under an affidavit. Q. An examination will show they are very much in detail?—A. These tables, like all those of all nations, excepting, perhaps, those of France, are imperfect, and are short of the true figures. I have no doubt that a large percentage should be added to the tables of both nations in the New World. But they are accurate as far as they go; if they err, it is in the direction of deficiency, not of excess. * Q. It is so on both sides 7–A. Yes. . . . Q. You are allowed a pretty large staff of persons to assist you as writers?—A. I have all the clerks and assistants I require. But a great many of those returns have been made to circulars. I have distributed through the Departments of the Treasury and Post-Office, and other functionaries. - Q. In view of those vast resources of the country, and the supply of sea-fish of all kinds, the improved and increased methods of catching the fish, do you think there is any one kind of fish, the entire failure of which would prove a very serious matter, such, for instance, as the mackerel obtained in the Gulf of St. Lawrence 2—A. I do not think that the entire failure of any kind of fish would affect the supply ; but this would stimulate the fishermen to renewed efforts regarding some other fish. If all the mackerel disappeared, their places would be sup- plied by the Southern mullet, which are more abundant than the mack- erel, and which could be taken in twice the quantity, if not more. If every mackerel was destroyed the mackerel fishermen would go down to the Southern coast, and take the mullet and pickle them. Q. Your last statement applies only to fish caught north of Cape May ?—A. Yes; it does not include any Southern fisheries at all, or any catch of the same fish in Southern waters, such as the bluefish or the mackerel. By Mr. Foster : - Q. Is Cape May far north of the treaty line 3—A. It is directly on the treaty line; this line cuts off Cape May and runs just at the north point Of the coast there. By Mr. Dana : Q. So that these tables do not include the opening of Delaware Bay?—A. No ; but only the fisheries on the coast of New Jersey—the outer coast of New Jersey—and from that northward. By Mr. Thomson : Q. All this evidence which you have given, with reference to the mullet becoming the fish of the future, is mere matter of speculation, is it not ?—A. It is nothing more than what I judge from the excellence of this fish, the ease with which they are taken, and the ease with which AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2833 they are cured, and the extent to which it is practiced as a local fishery by the people of North Carolina and other Southern States. Q. Has not that fishery been known for a great many years?—A. I cannot say. I have only known it since 1872 and 1873. It probably has been known as a fishery for some years. ºrsons have eaten these mullet 20 or 30 years ago down South 2– A. Yes. Q. And it has not progressed at all as food for Northern consump- tion?--A. It is not now used as a food-fish in the North; but it is a fish which occupies the place of Northern fish through a large portion of the Southern States. Q. Do you know from definite personal knowledge of your own Whether they would not rather have there one single salt mackerel than a Whole barrel of mullet 2—A. No, I cannot say anything about that— as to their preference. Q. I was told that this was the case no longer ago than this morning by a lady who has lived there; and I wanted to know what your experience in this respect was.-A. I must to my shame confess that I have never tasted a Salt mullet ; but I propose, as soon as I go home, to get a barrel of them and I will send some to Halifax, for the Commission. I hope they will make up their minds to try them ; I will do it the very first thing after I reach home, and I hope you will all try them. Q. Is it not a fact well known to those who are engaged in the sea- fisheries that Southern fish, or, in other words, fish taken in warm waters, are fish that will not bear transportation to Northern climates ?–A.. I cannot say anything about that at all; but I know the only peculiarity about mullet is, that it is a fall and winter fishery. It is a cold-water fishery. It begins in September, and lasts until November and Decem- ber. Q. You say it is a cold-water fishery; but the water is nothing like as Cold there as it is in our waters during the same months?—A. No ; but the water there is about as cold in winter—if not then quite as Cold—as it is here in the summer time. t - Q. Could cod, from your knowledge, live in the waters which are fre- quented by the mullet 2—A. No ; neither could the mullet live in the Waters which are frequented by the cod. Q. Are not the mullet also a fat fish 7–A. Yes; they are very fat. Q. IS not this fact also against transportation ?—A. I do not know. I am not versed in the physics of transportation. Q. How long ago is it since you first turned your attention to the fisheries at all?—A.. I have done so since 1871. Q. Previous to that time your specialties lay in another direction ?— A. No ; I have always been interested in fish as a branch of Zoology for a great many years. I have been a specialist in icthyology, and I described prior to that date hundreds of new species. Q. Speaking about the pounds established along the New England Shore, how many of them did you say were there?—A. 94. Q. In answer to Mr. Dana, you stated that this kind of fishing Was open under the Washington Treaty to British fishermen; do you think that you are quite right in stating that ?—A. Yes. g Q. Do you think that under this treaty we have a right to set down pounds upon American soil 3–A. You can, subject to the consent of the OWners of the shore—just the same as with respect to any fishery So prosecuted in the Dominion. Q. Is it possible for any person to carry on the business of pound fishing, except he is a resident on the coast 2—A, I see no reason why 178 F 2834. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. any one from Canada could not go to Long Island Sound or to Vineyard Sound, and prosecute this fishery. - Q. Then such a person must reside there 2—A. No. Very few of these pounds, and I think I may say that not one-half of the pound fishing in Buzzard's Bay and Vineyard Sound, are prosecuted by citi- zens of the State. : Q. A man must reside or remain there for the purpose of attending these pounds?—A. Yes; for two or three months in the year. Q. He must be a resident of the shore for two or three months in order to attend to these pounds 2—A. Certainly; he must be on the ground, as any fisherman must be when fishing, in his boat. Q. Practically and really this is a fishery which must be carried on by persons on the spot ?—A. Of course; all fisheries must be carried on on the spot; but they need not necessarily be carried on by resi- dents of that region, or by citizens of the State. Most of these fisheries in Buzzard’s Bay are carried on by people who do not usually live on the spot. 4. Q. At all events, do you seriously state that under the provisions of the Washington Treaty we have a right to put down pounds on the American shore ?—A. I think so, with the consent of the owner of the Shore. Q. That is another question.—A. Will you kindly read the clause of the Treaty of Washington in this relation ? Q. It is as follows: It is agreed by the High Contracting Parties that, in addition to the liberty secured to the United States fishermen by the Convention between Great Britain and the |United States, signed at London on the 20th day of October, 1818, of taking, curing, and drying fish on certain coasts of the British North American Colonies therein defined, the inhabitants of the United States shall have, in common with the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty, the liberty for the term of years mentioned in Article XXXIII of this treaty, to take fish of every kind, except shell-fish, on the sea-coasts and shores, and in the bays, harbors, and creeks of the Provinces of Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, and the colony of Prince Edward Island, and of the several islands there- unto adjacent, without being restricted to any distance from the shore, with permis- Sion to land upon the said coasts, and shores, and islands, and also upon the Magdaleri Islands, for the purpose of drying their nets and curing their fish. A. Yes. I do not understand that any mode of fishing is prohibited under this treaty, unless it is so mentioned in express terms, as is the Case With Shad, Salmon, and shell-fish. I do not understand that any mode of fishing is prohibited to the citizens of the opposite nation, except what conflicts with the local law of the country. Q. Can these pounds be put down without landing to make prepara- tion for that purpose 3—A. Yes, perfectly well. It is not absolutely necessary to go on shore at all to do it; indeed I know of a great many pounds which do not touch the shore, but which are started 20, 30, or 50 yards from the shore. - - Q. Do you seriously contend that there are territorial rights given us under the Washington Treaty because you recollect that the putting down of poles in the soil is a territorial right”—A. Yes. Q. Do I seriously understand you to contend that, under this treaty, rights are given either to the Americans on the one side or to the Brit- ish on the other, as to doing anything on the shores of either country, except landing to cure fish and dry nets"—A.. I understand that if you wished to start a pound in Buzzard's Bay, you could go to Naushon Island, owned by John M. Forbes, an eminent citizen of the United States, and with his permission you can do so; and that you require no permission in this regard either from the State of Massachusetts or the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2835 Government of the United States; he has precisely the same right to give authority to put down a pound, I think, as has Ashby, who was a Witness here and a native of Connecticut. Q: That is to say that Mr. Forbes, who owns the land, could allow me to go and put down a pound there 3—A. There is not the slightest Question about it. - Q. Could he not do that before this treaty was ratified ?–A. I do not know whether he could do so or not; I cannot say anything about that ; that is a legal question. z Q. He could have given me that right previous to the treaty just as Well as since 2—A. I do not know what exact right the treaty may give in this relation ; but that is no reason why this might not be done. I consider that this fishery is now perfectly open to Canadians. Q. Eſas not the mode in which the rivers on the coast of Maine have been treated for a number of years back depleted the waters on that coast or on the New England coast of cod, for instance, which you say Was Once one of the most important fish found there 3—A. The destruc- tion of river fish, in my opinion, has had more to do with the diminu- tion of inshore fish, such as cod and haddock Q. And mackerel, too !—A. No, not mackerel; this has nothing to do with them. Mackerel cannot be considered in that connection, be- cause they do not depend on the fish of those rivers for food ; but I think that such destruction has more than anything else to do with the de- crease of these fish I have mentioned, inshore; and the result of the measures which are now being taken by the States of Maine and Mass- achusetts, in restoring the river fisheries, will bring back the original historical abundance of the sea-fish inshore. Q. What this will do is as yet in the womb of the future; but at pres- ent are not those fisheries depleted?—A. The boat-fisheries for cod and haddock are now much inferior in yield on most parts of that coast to what was the case 50 or 100 years ago. & Q. You now allude to the coast-fisheries within the three-mile limit?— A. Yes; the fisheries carried on in open boats, which go out as far as a man can comfortably go in a day and come back again. Q. Do you wish the Commission to understand that this system of treating the rivers has destroyed the food of sea-fish, and therefore that the bait or food is not there to induce the cod to come inshore, but that this has had no effect on the fish outside of the three-mile limit 2–A. I cannot say how far out the effect extends, because some distance outside of the limits there are other fishes, such as herring and mackerel, and food of various kinds which they can get at. Q. Is it possible that the inshore fisheries can be either destroyed or very considerably depleted within the three-mile limit and yet leave the fisheries just outside of this limit as good as ever ?—A. I think so. Q. And undiminished ?–A. I think So, for the very reason that these fish naturally keep off from the shore. They are off-shore fish, and we find them largely inshore at certain seasons of the year because they then follow the fish that are coming inshore; and if you had an enor- mous number of shad and alewives and Salmon, and especially of ale- wives and shad inshore, that involves their pursuit by an enormous number of predatory fish, such as cod and haddock and pollock, just exactly as the same fish follow the herring and caplin on the coasts of the Dominion and Newfoundland. r e - Q. Then I understand you to mean that, although the food which these fishes prey upon may be destroyed by reason of the depletion of the rivers, this will only affect the fishing within three miles of the shore 2836 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. and have no effect on the fishing beyond this limit 2–A. I cannot say how far it will have effect. - Q. Will this effect stop short of the three-mile limit?—A. I think there are a great many concurrent agencies which affect the fish súpply at different seasons on the different parts of the coast, and that while the inshore fishing of herring and shad, or other incoming fish, regulates that to some extent, it does not cover the whole ground. Q. I want a direct answer: are you able to state that the destruction of bait, by reason of the bad treatment of these rivers, only affects the fishing along the coast to the extent of three miles from it 3–A. I can- not say that ; I cannot say how far such effect extends, and nobody can do SO. - - Q. It is reasonable to suppose that it extends for a considerable dis- tance farther than three miles from the coast 3–A. That I cannot say. Q. Would this not more likely drive the fish to other coasts where the rivers are not so treated 3–A. Fish certainly have to go where they can get food, and if they cannot procure it on one spot they have to go to Some other spot for it. gº h Q. Is it not probable that they will go where the rivers are not so badly treated 3–A. This depends on how far cod and haddock will migrate, under any circumstances. If they leave the shore, but can find an ample supply of food on Georges Bank or on Nantucket Shoals, they will probably stay there. Q. Do cod migrate at all? Is this known for a certainty to be the case ?—A. It is not certain that they have such migrations as we ascribe to the bluefish and mackerel; whether they traverse a mile of sea-bot- tom in search of food, or whether they go 100 miles for it, under any circumstances, I cannot say. Q. I understood you to say yesterday that you could not trace their migrations at all ?—A. No, I cannot. - Q. And you do not pretend to say that they do migrate 2 I rather understood you to say also that mackerel do not migrate %–A. They migrate, but they do not sweep along the coast—at least I do not think they do so, as was formerly supposed, for very many miles; but rather come direct from their winter grounds inshore. Q. I understood you to say, your theory at present was that there was a vast body of mackerel which, forming one wing of their army, passed along the American coast; and that another wing directed their course into the gulf?—A. Yes. Q. I see that in the Answer of the United States, page 10, the follow- ing language is used : The migration of mackerel in the spring begins on the Atlantic coast from a point as far south as Cape Hatteras. The first-comers reach Provincetown, Mass., about May 10. Here they begin to scatter, and they are found during the entire season along the New England coast. * “Whatever may be the theories of others on the subject,” says Professor Baird, “ the American mackerel-fisher knows perfectly well that in spring, about May, he will find the schools of mackerel off Cape Hatteras, and that he can follow them northward, day by day, as they move in countless myriads on to the coast of Maine, of Nova Scotia, and into the Gulf of St. Lawrence. They may be occasionally lost sight of by their sinking below the surface; but they are sure to present themselves, shortly after, to those who look for them farther north and east.” Do you now adhere to that statement 3–A. I think that was not the most philosophical expression on that subject. My views in regard to the proper theory concerning mackerel have been modified since then, to the extent I have alleged. - Q. In fact, if I correctly understood you yesterday, you rather inclined AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. . 2837 to the theory which has been started here, that mackerel are not a migratory fish at all, but hybernate in the mud 7–A. I cannot precisely Say; but the evidence is quite strong in favor of hybernation of some kind, though I do not consider the case proven in this respect ; at the same time I do not consider it philosophical to refuse to countenance its possibility. * * Q. Will you tell me how, if possible, it could be otherwise, if it is true that the mackerel have, in the spring, scales over their eyes, as has been described by witnesses here, and, as I understand, you admit.—A. I cannot say that this is the case; I have never seen it. Q. If these scales are on their eyes they could not possibly do other- Wise than hibernate?—A. I cannot say that; I am not a mackerel, and I could not tell what they do or what they do not do. Q. Is it certain that any fish, that you are aware of, hibernate in the mud 3—A. That is not certain, but it is believed to be the case. Q. Do you know of any fish which certainly does hibernate 3–A. The eel does. & Q. Is its eyes protected against the mud by scales?—A. This is not the case so far as I know. It has not been noted or reported. Q. How has it become a theory if it has never been noted ? Is it the want of experience with reference to mackerel that you do not know whether scales are found over its eyes or not?—A.. I have never caught mackerel in the critical period of the year when they are said to have scales over their eyes; but a specimen which I have preserved in alco. hol did have scales over its eyes, though the action of the alcohol on the cornea of the eye always tends to make it opaque and destroys its transparency. Q. Is there any period of the year when mackerel must be prevented from seeing, as far as you can judge from the specimen which you pos- sess?—A. No ; I cannot say that. Q. What are these scales for 7—A. I cannot say. The theory of the fishermen, however, is that it is to curb the roving habits of the mack- erel, and make it more ready to stay in the mud; and that otherwise they would not want to stay there; that is the hypothesis of the fisher- men, and I give it for what it is worth. Q. You do not assent to it?—A. No ; it is not proven to be true. Q. And it is not disproven 3–A. All that is proven in this respect is, that in winter we do not see the mackerel; they do not then school on the surface, nor do they go to the West Indies, or to Bermuda, or to Florida; nor do they then appear on the surface anywhere as far as the testimony has gone. - Q. With reference to the inshore fisheries in the State of Maine, and in the States of New England, generally, are they depleted or not?—A. The boat-fisheries there are not what they were 50 or 100 years ago; that, I think, I am perfectly safe in saying; but whether there has been any decrease in them during the past few years I cannot say. - Q. I now quote from your own report, part second, for the years 1872 and 1873, page xi; it is headed “Conclusions as to decrease of cod-fish- eries on the New England coast,” and it states: . Of all the various fisheries formerly prosecuted directly off the coast of New Eng- land, north of Cape Cod, the depreciation in that of the cod appears to be of the greatest economical importance. Formerly the waters abounded in this fish to such an extent that a large supply could be taken throughout almost the entire year along the Banks, especially in the vicinity of the mouths of the large rivers. At that time the tidal streams were almost choked up with the alewives, shad, and salmon that were struggling for entrance in the spring, and which filled the adjacent waters throughout a great part of the year. - 2838 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. As is well known, the erection of impassable dams across the streams, by preventing the ascent of the species just mentioned to their spawning-grounds, produced a very great diminution, and almost the extermination, of their numbers, so that whereas in former years a large trade could be carried on during the proper season, now nothing would be gained by the effort. On page xii you say this : - It would, therefore, appear that while the river-fisheries have been depreciated or destroyed by means of dams or by exhaustive fishing, the codfish have disappeared in equal ratio. This is not, however, for the same reason, as they are taken only with the line, at a rate more than compensated by the natural fecundity of the fish. I am well satisfied, however, that there is a relation of cause and effect between the present and past condition of the two series of fish; and in this I am supported by the opinion of Capt. U. S. Treat, of Eastport, by whom, indeed, the idea was first suggested to me. Captain Treat is a successful fisherman, and dealer in fish on a very large scale, and at the same time a gentleman of very great intelligence and knowledge of the many details connected with the natural history of our coast-fishes, and in this respect worthily representing Captain Atwood, of Provincetown. It is to Captain Treat that we owe many experiments on the reproduction of alewives in ponds, and the possi- bility of keeping salmon in fresh waters for a period of years. The general conclu- sions which have been reached, as the result of repeated conversations with Captain Treat and other fishermen on the coast, incline me to believe that the reduction in the cod and other fisheries, so as to become practically a failure, is due to the decrease off our coast in the quantity, primarily, of alewives, and secondarily of shad and Salmon, more than to any other cause. - It is well known by the old residents of Eastport that from thirty to fifty years ago cod could be taken in abundance in Passamaquoddy Bay and off Eastport, where only stragglers are now to be caught. The same is the case at the mouth of the Penobscot River and at other points along the coast, whére once the fish came close in to the shore, and were readily captured with the hook throughout the greater part of the year. A. Yes. & Q. Do you dissent now from that opinion ?—A. No ; I used that as an impressive lesson to the State legislature to induce them to pass the measures necessary to restore these river fisheries, which they are now doing very rapidily. Q. Where is Capt. U. S. Treat, of Eastport, now 2–A. In Japan, teaching the Japanese how to catch and cure fish. Q. On page xiv. of this Report you say: Whatever may be the importance of increasing the supply of salmon, it is trifling compared with the restoration of our exhausted cod-fisheries; and should these be brought back to their original condition, we shall find within a short time an in- crease of wealth on our shores, the amount of which it would be difficult to calculate. Not only would the general prosperity of the adjacent States be enhanced, but in the increased number of vessels built, in the large number of men induced to devote them- selves to maritime pursuits, and in the general stimulus to everything connected with the business of the sea-faring profession, we should be recovering, in a great measure, from that loss which has been the source of so much lamentation to political econo- mists and well-wishers of the country. That you still adhere to ?—A. Certainly. I made that report as im- pressive as I could in order to produce the effect desired, which was to cause the legislature to pass a law in this regard, and it has had that effect. They have passed such laws, and I hope that this. evil will be remedied in a reasonable number of years. Q. It is not remedied yet 2—A. No. Q. It takes a number of years to do that ?—A. I can give an instance where it has had such effect, if you like to have it. In Massachusetts the most has been done for the restoration of alewives and shad in the Merrimack River; and the shore fisheries there have now increased in a Very marked degree. At the present time it is perfectly possible for a man to go out in a boat from the city of Newburyport and catch 4,000 pounds of codfish and bring them back the same night. This is the only river in Massachusetts in which very great efforts have been made to restore these river fisheries; and it is now possible to capture these fish AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2839 in much greater quantities than was the case 10 years ago; and this I ascribe to the action of the State government with regard to the res- toration of river fish. . - Q. How many pounds did you mention ?—A. 4,000. Q. Caught by a single man 3–A. Two men will do it; a man with a trawl and an assistant will go out in an open boat in the morning from the city of Newburyport and come back at night, or go out at night and return in the morning, and in the mean time take 4,000 pounds of cod. That is the only point along there at which, at that distance from the shore, I know that it is possible to catch cod in such numbers. Q. Must not a great lapse of time, or at least a very considerable lapse of time occur, before the fisheries destroyed, as you have here de- Scribed, can be restored by the process you speak of ?—A. I think that this depends on the amount of time necessary for the restoration of the fish, which run out to sea from the rivers. I think that if this year there are no such fish as alewives, &c., to run into these rivers, and that if next year a great army was to so run in, concurrent with that army, an army of cod and other fish would be there to prey upon them. Q. I see that in your Report for 1872 and 1873, referring to the lake fish, you say on page lxxxi : - The restoration of food-fishes to localities originally tenanted by them, or their transfer to new waters, is, however, a question of time; and in the immense extent of Our river and lake systems, many years must necessarily elapse before the work can be accomplished. A. That is a great number of years, certainly ; but that does not so much refer to any particular river as to the aggregate rivers and lakes scattered over the whole body of the United States. Q. You say here that “many years must necessarily elapse” 7–A. Certainly. - -- Q. When did you commence this work?—A. The actual process of artificial propagation began, under my direction, in 1872. • Q. Do you refer to any term of years? I suppose that you mean a period of 10, 12, or 14 years.-A. It might be more. The time of course depends on the expenditure involved, and the concurrence of suitable legislation to protect the fish, and many other points. Q. How many fish-breeding establishments have you in the States ?— A. Nearly every State in the Union has now a series of fish commis- sioners, whose business it is to propagate fish within their borders. Q. There is only one in each State?—A. There is one State establish- ment; and a certain number of private establishments in each, founded for the purpose of gain. Q. Do you know how many there are in Canada. ?—A. I know there are a great many. Canada is doing most admirably in this respect. Q. And very much more in proportion than the United States ?—A. No ; I think not. I think by far less in proportion. Q. In proportion 3—A. Yes. - Q. To population?—A. I do not say according to population. I shall Qualify that statement by saying that what is done in Canada is done on a much less scale of magnitude than is the case in the United States. I mean that the aggregate of artificial propagation in the United States is much greater than the aggregate in Canada; but I would not take a ratio. I think that both Canada and the United States are doing as much as they can in this regard, in the time that has been allowed for the purpose. - Q. I suppose that Canada is doing a very large work in this connec- tion 7—A. She is doing most admirably—yes. 284() AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. She is expending large sums of money on it'—A. Certainly. She is doing most admirably. I am very happy to say that Canada and the |United States are working concurrently in a great many directions in the line of artificial fish Culture. Q. Do you know the Canadian establishment on Detroit River?—A. Yes. Q. Is it doing a large business?—A. I don’t know what it is doing this year; but last year I understand that it did a very large business. Q. It then hatched 10,000,000 eggs º–A. Yes, very likely. - Q. You say that cod cannot live except in cold water?—A. The cod is an inhabitant of the colder waters. Q. Are you aware whether or not the Gulf Stream during the sum - mer months swings in at all more toward the American coast 3—A. It does. - Q. For how many miles?—A. I cannot say. Q. Would that have any effect in driving the cod away from the American shores?—A. No ; not the slightest. - Q. You think not ?—A. Yes; it has not the slightest effect on them. If you go down to a certain depth in the ocean, in the tropics or any- where else, you will find the water cold enough for cod; and there is nothing to prevent the cod being as abundant in tropical Waters—say off Brazil or the West Indies—as anywhere else; as far as temperature is concerned, it is cold enough there for them at a certain depth. Q. Have they ever been caught there?—A. Not that I know of; but the water there is cold enough for them. Q. Is it not very venturesome to state that there is nothing to prevent them staying there?—A. They may be there, but they have not been caught there. Nobody has fished at those great depths, for you have got to go down from 6,000 to 15,000 and 20,000 feet to find that tempera- ture in tropical seas. # Q. Have you the slightest idea as to what sort of animals reside down there?—A. Yes. We have a very good knowledge of such species as can be taken up by the trawling line and dredge from those depths; and i. know that an ample supply of food suitable for cod is to be found there. J. Q. Has any beam-trawl or dredge ever taken cod in those regions?— A. No ; you do not catch cod with small trawls any more than you can SO Catch Whales. - By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Would not the temperature in those waters interfere with the spawn of the cod, as this spawn floats?—A.. I think that the Water there might be too warm for the development of codfish eggs in the abstract; but the effect would be to make them hatch out more rapidly than would be the case in cold water. Of course it is a very serious question to decide whether, with the present constitution of the cod, its eggs would develop in warm water, though whether it might not evolute and develop into a Warm-Water cod I do not know. IBy Mr. Thomson: Q. On page 60 of your Report for 1872 and 1873, you use the follow- ing language: It is in another still more important connection that we should consider the alewife. It is well known that within the last thirty or forty years the fisheries of cod, haddock, and hake along our coasts have measurably diminished, and in some places ceased entirely. Enough may be taken for local consumption, but localities which formerly furnished the material for an extensive commerce in dried fish have been entirely abandoned. § AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 284.1 Various causes have been assigned for this condition of things, and, among others, the alleged diminution of the sea-herring. After a careful consideration of the subject, how- ever, I am strongly inclined to believe that it is due to the diminution, and, in many instances, to the extermination of the alewives. As already remarked, before the con- struction of dams in the tidal rivers the alewife was found in incredible numbers along our coast, probably remaining not far from shore, excepting when moving up into the fresh water, and, at any rate, spending a considerable interval off the mouths of the rivers either at the time of their journey upward or on their return. The young, too, after returning from the ocean, usually swarmed in the same localities, and thus furnished for the larger species a bait such as is not supplied at present by any other fish, the sea-herring not excepted. We know that the alewife is particularly attract- ive as a bait to other fishes, especially for cod and mackerel. A. Do I say mackerel ? - Q. Yes.—A. That is an inadvertence. I do not think that the ale- Wife is a bait for mackerel. Q. You say: ... We know that the alewife is particularly attractive as a bait to other fishes, espe- cially for cod and mackerel. * A. Well, I should not have said that. Q. The alewives are the same as the fish we call gaspereaux in New Brunswick 3–A. Yes. Q. You further say: - d , Alewives enter the streams on the south coast of New England before the arrival of the bluefish ; but the latter devote themselves with great assiduity to the capture of the young as they come out from their breeding-ponds. The outlet of an alewife pond is always a capital place for the blue-fish, and as they come very near the shore in such localities, they can be caught there with the line by what is called “heaving ºling.” or throwing a squid from the shore, and hauling it in with the utmost rapidity. - The coincidence, at least, in the erection of the dams, and the enormous diminution in the number of the alewives, and the decadence of the inshore cod-fishery, is cer- tainly very remarkable. It is probable, also, that the mackerel fisheries have suf- tº: in the same way, as these fish find in the young menhaden and alewives an attract- ive bait. - You see you say that twice.—A. That is an inadvertence. Q. You say: It is probable also that the mackerel fisheries have suffered in the same way, as these fish find in the young menhaden and alewives an attractive bait. A. This is the case on the northern coast probably. Q. It is hardly an inadvertence?—A. It is an inadvertence. It is a conclusion that is not justified by the fact. Q. Then you dissent from that opinion now?—A. Yes; I do not con- sider that it has a bearing on the mackerel question. t Q. All that goes to show that all these speculative opinions are enti- tled to little weight; you see that you have changed your opinion in this respect?—A. Certainly; as the data vary the conclusions also vary. Q. I suppose you will admit that there is not the slightest reason why Within the next three years you may not have come back to the same Opinion which you now repudiate, or have then formed opinions totally different from those which you now express before the Commission ?— A. I cannot say ; that will depend entirely on the facts as they come. Q. After all, this is all the purest theory º–A. It is an hypothesis; it is not a theory. Q. Well, it is an hypothesis 2—A. It is not a theory until it is abso- lutely certified by the facts. Q. Then, of course, an hypothesis is more vague than a theory. You gave in a mass of figures just now, which you state were made up by your assistant, based upon information which you have got from some 2842 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. of the witnesses here, in answer to questions put them, and what not— have I understood you rightly.?—A. Partly. . Q. And your assistant has verified them by his affidavit—have I under- stood you rightly 7–A. Yes; they are verified by the affidavit of the assistant who made them up. - Q. What sort of an affidavit is it 2 Does he state that these figures are correct, or simply that they are there 7–A. He certifies that he has compiled them, and what they represent. . . . (For this affidavit see No. 3, Appendix O.) Q. In point of fact you cannot yourself swear that this statement is correct?—A. I cannot swear that ; but it is made up from the statistics of the Fishery Commission and investigations. - Q. Even to that I do not think you can swear?—A. No more than Mr. Whitcher or Mr. Smith can swear to the correctness of Canadian statistics. Q. You directed it to be made up by one of your assistants?—A. Yes. Q. And you do not know whether it has been made up correctly or not ?—A. No more than any man can swear to the accuracy of his assist- ant's work. Q. As a fact, you have no personal knowledge as to its correctness?— A. Certainly not. - Q. You directed it to be done º–A. Precisely; it stands on the same footing as any table made up by a clerk. Q. Did you directly take into consideration statements made by Wit- nesses here?—A. I have very largely taken into consideration inquiries made by Mr. Goode, my assistant, of witnesses here, according to the same definite plan which I have adopted elsewhere. Q. Inasmuch as we have not the results of what these inquiries were, and since the Commissioners have not them before them, none of these inquiries which you made, and none of the information which you thus obtained, are before us, the papers being locked up in your desk.-A. They are all in the archives of the Fishery Commission. Q. Then we have no means of testing the accuracy of those figures?— A. No ; not the slightest. They are there for what they are Worth. I present them with the affidavit which was made by my assistant. Q. You admit that you have not furnished us with any means of at- testing their accuracy º–A. You must take them for What they are worth. They are of the same value as any table published by the Fish- ery Department of Canada or the United States or anywhere else. Q. If I rightly understood your answer to Mr. Dana yesterday, you rather think that the throwing over of offal amounts to nothing 3–A. No ; I do not think that it does amount to anything. Q. I thought you gave a rather interesting description of Sea-fleas.- A. I merely say that it is a question whether it is or was injurious to the food of fishes on the coast, as has been maintained. It is a question as to which we have no definite proof that it injures the fishes; and I am inclined to believe that it has more of a local and immediate effect on the fish than it does injury to the fish. Q. Would it not necessarily injure the spawn in its neighborhood?— A. No. Q. You think not ?—A. No. Q. Not if thrown over on the top of spawn 3–A. No ; you might throw it over all day long and try to injure a load of floating SpaWn and you could not do it. Nobody has ever suggested that gurry affects the Spawn. By Spawn I Suppose you mean eggs. Q. Yes.-A. No ; nothing of the kind is to be thought of. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 284.3 Q. You quoted yesterday, Mr. Whiteaves's Report; he says on page 11: In case Americans are allowed to fish in Canadian waters, the custom (said to be practiced by them) of splitting the fish caught at sea, and throwing the offal overboard, on the fishing ground, should not be permitted. A. I do not think that I quoted Mr. Whiteaves on that point, but with regard to the spawning-time of mackerel in the bay. Q. In your Report of 1872 and 1873, Mr. Milner is your assistant — A. Yes. Q. On page 19 I find this language used : THROWING OFFAL ON THE FISHING-GROUNDS.—It is the uniform testimony of all fishermen that throwing offal or dead fish in the vicinity of the fishing-grounds is offen- sive to the whitefish, and drives him away. The whitefish is peculiarly cleanly in its instincts, and has an aversion for muddy or foul water of any description. Most fisher- men regard their own interest sufficiently to be careful in this particular, while many careless and shiftless men injure themselves and others by dumping offal and dead fish anywhere in the lake where they find it convenient, reducing the catch in the vicinity for several months. A. Yes. Q. It is also stated : Unsalable fishes are generally thrown overboard in the vicinity of the nets. You do not dissent from that opinion ?–A. No ; not at all. The cases, however, are totally different. There are no scavengers in fresh water as there are in the sea; there are no sea-fleas, or sculpin, or lob- sters, or anything of the kind, to clean up offal in fresh water, as is the Case in the Ocean. Q. In your opinion, are purse-Seiners proper or improper agents for taking fish 7–A. I have not formed any opinion on the subject; but I am inclined to think, however, that this is not a destructive mode of fishing. They destroy a good many fish, but I do not think that they diminish the absolute number of fish in the Sea. e By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Will you repeat that ?—A. I say I do not think that they affect the total number of the fish in the sea materially, although they destroy and waste a great many fish. If you will permit me I would state my reason for this view ; it is this: Every school of mackerel has a large body of predatory fish attendant upon it, such as dogfish, sharks, and other species, which are bound to have so many fish a day. They will eat their one, two, or three fish a day, and if they cannot get them dead they will eat them alive; therefore, if a large body of young mackerel is thrown out of these purse-Seines, besides mackerel which are rejected and worthless, the predatory fish that are attendant upon the mackerel will eat these dead fish, and if they do not find them dead they will take them alive; so it does not affect the number of fish in the sea. By Mr. Thomson : Q. Are you positive about that ; do you undertake to say that the predaceous fishes will, in preference to capturing live fish, which they can easily do, be content with dead ones 7 — A. I think that is very likely. - Q. There, there—you say “very likely 7%—A. I cannot say. I am not a predacious fish ; but I would prefer a live fish. I am pretty Sure, however, that these fish are quite ready to be saved the trouble of taking their prey. It is on precisely the same principle that bait-fish, Such as caplin and herring, are placed on hooks and cast overboard to catch the same fish, which follow and eat them in the natural way. I think this may be inferred from that. 284.4 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. \ Q. You have something to do with the Annual Record of Science and Industry, I believe 3–A. Something—yes. Q. Do you agree with the language used in an article contained on page 473 of this journal for 1872?–A. I did not write that, but I pub- lished it. ' - Q. Have you in any article stated that you dissent from it 3–A. No. It is not my business to do so. That article merely reflects the opinion of the writer. I would be very sorry to believe one-half of what I pub- lish in that periodical; but it expresses the progress of belief and science, and I take it accordingly. Q. It is a matter of speculation whether dead fish are eaten, as you Say, by predaceous fishes; this is mere theory 7–A. I have no doubt that they are so eaten. By Mr. Whiteway: Q. You have stated that the largest quantity of codfish taken in the ºtest possible time was in the vicinity of the Loffoden Islands 2—A. €S. Q. You said that something like 25 millions were taken by 12,000 people?—A. Yes. - Q. In a very short time—in the course of three months 7–A. Yes; and in a very small space. Q. Where did you get your statistics from ?—A. From a report of the Norwegian Government. Q. For what year?—A. 1868, I think. Q. Whose report was it 3–A. It is an extremely hard jaw-breaking title; it is an abstract, prepared by Hermann Baars, of Bergen, Norway. It was an article prepared by him for presentation at the Paris Exhibi- tion. - Q. You have not seen reports published since that time 2—A. O, yes; I have them much later. Q. Did these later statistics correspond with the former as regards the quantity ?—A. I know that the capture of cod in Loffoden Islands, in 1876, amounted to 21 or 22 millions; I have the figures here. Q. Are you aware what quantity of codfish is caught on the coast of Newfoundland 3–A. No. I have been earnestly trying to get the sta- tistics of Newfoundland in this respect, but I have not been able to ob- tain them as yet. I hope you will send them to me. Q. You are not aware whether it is an inshore or deep-sea fishery on that island 7–A. No. I know nothing about it. Q. You say that fish are dried and used as food for cattle in these islands and in Norway ?—A. Yes. - Q. What sort of cattle use it?—A. Horses, oxen, and cows; they eat it with great avidity. Q. What portion do they make use of 7–A. Any part, but more gen- erally the heads, which are offal; they make most admirable nutriment. Q. You say that a great many nations dress very largely in the skins of cod and Salmon ?—A. Yes. Q. Will you kindly tell me what nations these are 7–A. They are Tchuktchi, the Aleutian Islanders, the Norton Sound Esquimaux, other natives of Alaska, and a few others. - - Q. You say further that the most extensive resorts of cod are the Grand Banks and George's Bank; can you tell me the quantity of fish taken on these banks 3–A. No ; I have not made any investigation or tabulation in this regard. - Q. Then you really base that opinion upon no data ?—A. I merely base it on my general impression on that subject. I merely speak of AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2845 these as being the most prominent particular banks and localities which the cod frequent. In speaking of the islands and other places in this connection, I mentioned banks off the coast of Labrador, but I did not refer to the great sweep of northern waters where the cod is found dif- fused. I referred more particularly to the places that are known and publicly mentioned. What is not published in this regard I know noth- ing about. - Q. With reference to Labrador, can you answer whether the fish are taken inshore—that is, within the three-mile range, or on the Banks off. shore?—A. I am told, but I cannot say with what certainty, that at certain seasons of the year the cod are there taken in great quantities inshore from boats, but that the great bodies of the fish are on the Banks at Some distance from the shore. \, Q. Are these Banks fished 3–A. That I cannot tell. . Q. Where are these Banks?—A. As far as I can learn, they extend at a distance of some 15 or 25 miles, perhaps, along almost the entire length of the coast of Labrador. Q. Will you pledge yourself to that statement 2–A. No ; I know noth- ing about it. - Q. From whom did you get this information ?—A. From the published writings of Professor Hind. Q. I think he indicates in these writings the exact position of these Banks?—A. I think that probably he does. I may have located them too near or too far from the shore. I speak merely in general terms. Q. I think that his report only indicates the existence of banks on certain portions of the coast of Labrador?—A. Perhaps I may have made them too extensive. * Q. You have referred to a bank on which codfish are taken, off Cape Cod, about 20 miles, I think, in length ; can you give me any informa- tion as regards the annual product of this bank 7–A. I think you will find that given in Captain Atwood’s testimony. Q. Can you give it'—A. No ; I know nothing of it, except from Cap- tain Atwood. Q. IS any report made in any public office in Massachusets or the States, from which you can gather information as regards the exact Quantity of fish taken outside of the three-mile limit, and inside of this limit?—A. No. - Q. In other words, is a report concerning the quantity of fish taken within and without this limit published ?–A. No. Q. Is nothing published in this relation ?—A. It is my business, or my self-imposed mission to collect that information, and I am doing so as fast as I can. I hope that my next report will contain a great deal of this and other useful information. * Q. How many vessels are engaged in this fishery off Cape Cod 2–A. I cannot tell you; but I have a great deal of information on this subject in my records, which, however, I do not carry with me, and I do not trust my memory for anything. Q. I think you referred to the herring fishery as yielding a very great Quantity of fish on the American coast?—A. Yes. Q. On the coast of the United States ?—A. Yes. Q. And the coast of Massachusetts 3–A. Yes. Q. Is that yield so great as you mention, during the winter 3—A. It is during both spring and fall. These fish are found all along the coast in the spring. Q. During what months is this the case in the spring 3–A. In April and May. - 2846 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. And in Winter?—A. I do not think that they are caught in winter north of Cape Cod; I do not think so; but so little is known of the biology and the natural history of herring that this might be the fact, and yet it be not known—I mean not known to the ordinary public. It was entirely new to me five years ago that herring spawned on the Massa- chusetts coast at all. Q. Then there is no winter herring-fishery there ?—A. The winter fishery is a very small one; it is carried on around Block Island and Narragansett Bay, but whether capabilities exist for prosecuting a win- ter fishery elsewhere on the coast I cannot say. Q. How do you account then for the fact that such a number of your vessels come to the southern coast of Newfoundland for herring, if they are so prolific on your own coast 7—A. That I cannot say. Why trade follows one line or direction rather than another I do not know. They may not have appliances for catching them on our coast, and they may Inot have the means of taking them in such quantities as is possible at Newfoundland; but it is certainly a notorious fact that herring are much more abundant on the coast of Newfoundland than they are on the coast of the United States; though whether the herring that are wanted on the United States coast could or could not be had in the United States, I cannot say; but I do think that herring are vastly more abundant in Newfoundland and the Bay of Fundy than they are farther south. Q. That accounts, then, for the number of your vessels that come to Newfoundland for them, no doubt. Give us the number of miles of United States coast along which fishing rights have been conceded to British subjects under the Washington Treaty 2–A. 1,112. Q. Can you give the extent of the Dominion coast, including that of Newfoundland 3–A. Yes; the coast line of the Province of Canada is 810 miles; of New Brunswick, 1,000 miles; of Nova Scotia, 390 miles; of Newfoundland, 1,650 miles; of Grand Manan, 30 miles; of Prince Edward Island, 285 miles; of the Magdalen Islands, 85 miles; and of Anticosti Island, 265 miles; the total length of the coast line of East- ern British North America is 4,515 miles, four times that of the United States east of Cape Cod. - IBy Mr. Dana : * Q. Following the bays 2–A. Following the large bays, but omitting the Smaller ones. By Mr. Whiteway: Q. In your statement regarding the annual product of the Dominion fisheries, you have not included the Newfoundland fisheries?—A. No ; I have only that of the Dominion of Canada. - Q. Are you aware that something like 1,500,000 or 1,600,000 quintals of fish are caught in Newfoundland alone?—A. I think that is very probable, but I do not know. Q. Besides the large herring fishery?—A. I am very anxious to know exactly what the Newfoundland catch is; I have made inquiries respect- ing it; but I have not been able to obtain any such public data. Q. You say that the depletion of the codfish on the coast has been the result of the depletion of the river fisheries on the coast of Massa- chusetts 3—A. I gave that as presumably one reason for it. It is prob- ably a very important element in the fishery. Q. Then any act which may prove injurious to the bay fisheries on the coast would seriously affect the inshore fisheries by removing that which induced the cod to go on the coast 3—A. Yes; it would have its. effect, I think. Possibly a very decided effect. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2847 Q. As a naturalist I would ask you to answer one or two questions. What do you mean by the term “fish”? Can you give us a definition?— A. Well, a fish is a cold-blooded vertebrate, having a particular mode of respiration. It breathes through gills instead of lungs, and it has a heart of a particular construction. - * Q. I will read the definition from a book published in New York by Harper Brothers, the Encylopedia of Commerce, edited by I presume that is an authority that can be relied upon (reads definition). I suppose that is a definition that can be relied upon?--A. No; I think it cannot be relied upon at all. That would make anything that floats in the water a fish. So that the seal would be a fish and the Otter would be a fish. - Q. This is the Encyclopedia of Commerce. I suppose it is reliable. I mean as an encyclopedia of commerce?—A. Well, I don’t know. I don’t think it is quoted very much. It is probably a very good compi- lation. There are a great many books of that class that one has occasion to look at without feeling that they are perfectly accurate. - Q. Do you consider the seal a fish?—A. Not at all. Q. Why?—A. Because it is a warm-blooded mammal. It breathes by means of lungs, &c. Q. IS not the whale the same?—A. The whale is no more a fish than the Seal. ***- Q. It is a mammal; it is a swimmer ?—A. If you were to fall over- board in mid-ocean you would be a swimmer. Q. How is it with the Walrus?—A. It is a mammal, not a fish. Q. So is the whale, is it not ?—A. Yes. Q. How do you draw a distinction between the whale and the seal; the one you consider a fish and the other not ?—A. I don’t consider the Seal a fish. Q. I thought you did. Now, don’t you consider it a very unreasonable action on the part of the United States, the refusal to admit Seal-oil as fish-oil. Perhaps you don’t care to answer?—A. I don't object to answer. I am not a politician. I am perfectly willing to answer the Question. I know that the penguin is considered a fish, Commercially— that is, that penguin-oil is received in England as fish-oil. Q. That is a very important matter. I should like very much to have it taken down that, as a commercial oil, the penguin-oil is considered a fish-oil 3—A. It is in London. - Q. Is it not in the United States ?—A. No ; but as far as I am informed the oil is classified in the London custom-house and trade returns as a fish-oil. - Q. What is the quintal in weight?—A. 112 pounds in some localities, and in some 100 pounds. Q. It was given here as 114 pounds 2—A. Well, it might be 114 pounds. It is simply my impression that the quintal is considered 112 pounds. I would not be positive. A practical fish-dealer would give more positive information than I could. By Mr. Dana : Q. Here, on the 148th page of British Testimony we have a letter from Governor Hill to the Earl of Kimberly, taken from the journals of the legislative council in Newfoundland. It appears here, in the evidence of Judge Bennett, as follows: GOVERNMENT HOUSE, Newfoundland, July 4, 1871. MY LORD: I have the honor to inform your lordship that on the 1st instant I sent a telegram to your lordship, as follows, viz.: “In reference 284.8 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. to terms of Washington Treaty, it is understood that fish-oil includes seal-oil. Explanation will oblige this government.” And on the 3d instant received the following reply, viz.: “I am of opinion that fish-oil does not include seal-oil.—EARL FCIMBERLY.” I have, &c., - STEPHEN J. H.ILL. The Right Honorable the EARL OF KIMBERLEY, • - déC., dºc., d36. Now you were asked a question what you thought of the exclusion of that oil. - Mr. WHITEWAY. He didn’t answer it. Mr. DANA. You withdrew it, didn't you? Perhaps this letter occurred to your mind. - The PRESIDENT. We suggested that the question had better be with- drawn. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Before you leave, there are one or two questions I would like to ask you. We have been told by a witness—I think it was your pilot— that there was a difference in the appearance of the codfish that was caught in certain waters. I would like to ask if you have noticed that yourself.-A. Yes, there are a great many varieties of cod. They are, as far as I believe, one species, but they assume peculiar varieties, de- pending upon the particular bottom they are found on and the food they consume. Experts will tell you from what Banks particular fish are taken. For instance, inshore cod are nearly all red, while outside cod are gray. Some have larger heads, some smaller, some have stout shoulders, and some are slender, but all these differences are local and do not involve a distinction of species. - Q. Would not that, in your opinion, confirm the theory that the cod is not really a migratory fish 2–A. It would. That is very good evi- dence that there is no great migration. Q. There is another question I wished to ask you. You gave us a very interesting account of a company that has been formed for the purpose of catching these predaceous fish, and you seemed to think it would have the effect of materially diminishing their numbers. Well, if human means can reduce the predaceous fish, would you not think that the appliances that are being used by fishermen must be diminish- ing the edible fish 3–A. I don’t think that the amount captured by man has any appreciable influence upon the supply of fish in the Sea. Q. Well, that is what I understood you to say.—A. That whatever effect is produced by waste or extravagance in the capture of the fish is itself so trifling, in proportion to the natural wear and tear of the fish, that it may be thrown entirely out of account. The report of the Brit- ish Fishery Commission is very satisfactory on that point. Q. The only reason why I asked the question was that you seemed to think this company would succeed in reducing the number of preda- ceous fish.-A. Well, those are large and take a long time to get their growth. You can imagine a limit to the abundance of certain fish like the shark, though you cannot to the other fish, such as the cod and the mackerel. Q. You are United States Commissioner. Are you clothed' with authority respecting the several States of the Union?—A. No. Q. Well, have you any authority º–A. I have none, except that they are all perfectly willing to have me spend all the money I will in their AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 28 49 ports, and that they are willing to have me put as many shad, salmon, and cod, and useful food-fishes as I think I can spare in their waters. Q. Have the United States collectively or the individual States the constitutional control over their fisheries; that is, their inshore fisher- ies 3–A. The river fisheries are under the control of the several States, and the question of the jurisdiction of the sea fisheries has not yet been settled. For the present it lies in the States. The general government has exercised no control or authority on the inshore fisheries. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Referring to your hypothesis about the waters of the world being Supplied with one kind of fish as another leaves, what have you to say in regard to the whale fishery; what is going to supply that ?—A. Well, a fishery diminishes to a certain extent until it does not pay, and then is abandoned. After being let alone it increases and again becomes a profitable enterprise. Q. Have any of the species of fish that were used in ancient times disappeared 2 They used fish in ancient times just as much as they do now. Do you know of any tribe having actually disappeared ?–A.. The only kind of fish that has gone entirely out, so far as I know, is a kind of mackerel that was formerly found, known as the chub-mackerel or big-eye mackerel. It was formerly well known. Thirty years ago it was extremely common, a steady measurable article of the fish supply. I have been in search of specimens ever since I have been in my present line of inquiry, and have a standing offer of $25 for a specimen, but it has not been produced. There are many instances of the local abandonment of extensive shores. For instance, herring was formerly abundant on the coast of Sweden. - - - Q. Do you refer to a distinct species of mackerel"—A. A totally dis- tinct species. We had two species on our coast and now we have only one. I dare say there may be a few, but we don’t find them as formerly. No. 70. HOWARD M. CHURCHILL, of Rustico, Prince Edward Island, a United States citizen, fish-merchant, called on behalf of the Govern- ment of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster : Question. How long have you lived at Rustico 2–Answer. Nineteen years. Q. Have you been there usually through the winter ?—A. Most of the time. Some winters I have been in Boston, and some in Charlottetown. Q. Most of the winters as well as summers you have been on the island 3—A. Yes. - Q. What is your business?—A. Fishing. Q. Explain how you carry it on ?—A. Well, we engage men in the spring. I do differently from most of them, I expect; I hire them by the month. - Q. To do what ?—A. To fish or to do anything else on shore, but the general thing is to fish. Q. How many men do you hire ?—A. The average is about 45. Q. How do you hire them 2–A. I hire them by the month, feed and find them and everything. Q. Do you supply boats?—A. Yes. Q. How many boats?—A. Eight. 179 F 2850 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. How many stages have you?—A. I only run one; I have others, but I only run one. g Q. Do you have a store also in connection with your business %–A. Yes. Q. What do you pay these men as wages. You say they are employed by you ?—A. The average wages are, I think, about $22 or $23 each. Q. Do you find them 3–A. Yes. - Q. For how many months in the year 7—A. Very near four—three and a half. Q. Then you have the total produce of their catch 7–A. Yes. Q. What do they catch 3—A. Fish—mackerel principally. Q. Now, you have a house at Rustico 3–A. Yes. Q. You live there with your family º—A. Yes. Q. What are your facilities for observing where the vessels and boats fish off Rustico 3–A. I can see. Of course we are not on a cape, but we can see a few miles around. Q. Your place of business and home are in sight of the harbor, and the sea beyond it?—A. Yes. Q. Now I would like you to tell the Commission where the boats fish for mackerel off Rustico; how far out they go and how close in 3–A. It is all distances, of course. In the Spring and Summer months they al- ways fish in closer. * Q. EIow near is “close in 7'-A. From a mile to three miles. Later in the Season they have to go out. - 8 Q. How far?—A. As far as ten miles. The last month of this year they were out ten miles. The average is eight or seven. They go out So that you can’t see the boats. Q. What is the size of the boat?—A. Well, the boats are 27 to 30 feet keel. - Q. How does the size of the boats that are built for the last two or three years compare with those that were used previously 7–A. They have built larger boats for the last two or three years. A few years ago they used small boats altogether, about 15 or 16 feet keel. Q. Are they being made bigger to enable them to go farther out 3– A. Yes. It is fall fish we depend upon mostly. The small boats don't like to go off for them. & Q. What do you mean by saying you depend mostly upon the fall fish 7–A. Well, the mackerel go off in the fall. They don’t keep as close in as they do in the spring and summer. --- Q. Which part of the mackerel season is the most important, the earlier or the latter part 3—A. The latter part, of course. Q. Why?—A. Because the mackerel are larger and fatter later in the Season. They are growing. The first mackerel are always poor. The last mackerel we expect to be fat. w Q. Has the mackerel season ended yet 2—A. It is about ended; they are hauling in the boats now. Q. When did it begin 3–A. The 10th of July. Q. For boat-fishing, has this been a good year 2—A. Yes; it has been a fair, pretty good year. - Q. What has been the quality ?–A. The average has been poor. Q. But the quantity ?—A. The quantity has not been great, but the prices have been high. We haven’t caught a great many. Q. How was the year's business in 1867 ?—A. Poor, very poor. . Q. What was the result of last year's business? Did you make or lose ?—A. We lost. Q. How much 3—A. Over $3,000. AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2851 Q. Will you make it up this year 7–A. I wish I could ; I will not do any better; I would be satisfied with that. Q. You have had an opportunity of observing, of course, where the United States vessels fish 7–A. So far as there are any outside off Rustico. Q. You know where the mackerel-fishers fish off Rustico 3–A. Yes. Q. How far off do they go?—A. They are sometimes inside and some- times outside. The last two or three years we haven’t had any there to Speak of. I think ten or a dozen is as high as I have seen within two or three years. *. Q. Usually, principally or chiefly, do they fish within or more than three miles from land off Rustico 2–A. It is very hard to say; I should say about three miles was where they fish. Sometimes you see the fleet Outside, and the boats run out to see what they are doing. It is a part of the island they don’t care about staying in close. | Q. Why, is there not a harbor 2—A. There is no harbor; there is a harbor, but it is not fit for a vessel. A vessel can’t come into Rustico. Q. Why not?—A. There is no water; it is a barred harbor. - Q. What is the depth of water over the bar?—A. Eight feet of water. Q. With what tide 2—A. With a good tide. - Q. TXo you know about how far it is from the land off Rustico to a straight line run from Cape North to East Point? Suppose you drew a straight line from Cape North to East Point, how long would the line be from Rustico to meet that straight line at right angles 2—A.. I don’t know any more than I have heard. I have heard it stated as high as 27 miles. It is over 20. I never measured. I don’t know anything about it any more than I have heard. Q. You were on the island during the Reciprocity Treaty 3–A. Yes. Q. You were there at the time when there was a duty on mackerel?— A. Yes. - Q. You were there when the Washington Treaty passed, and have been since %—A. Yes. - Q. Now, I want to know what you regard the effect of the fishery clauses of the Washington Treaty to be upon the fishing interest of Prince Edward Island 7–A. Well, so far as that is concerned, we would rather put our fish in free than pay $2 a barrel; that is all. Q. You know how you regard it; I want your opinion.—A. Well, that is all; of course I look at the money; not anything else. We Would rather not pay $2 than pay it. * Q. Did you have to pay it when there was a duty on it 2–A. Yes. Q. Didn’t it come out of the people you sold the fish to in the States? —A. If I hire men, I lose that. t * Q. You are satisfied of that ?—A. I am sure of it. Q. Suppose the duty was to be reimposed on fish; what effect would it have on your business?—A. Well, I don’t know. Of course I could not hire men to begin with. If I did, I would have to hire them at less Wages. If I thought that really was to be the case I would not hire men at all. - Q. You would not hire men to fish for you at all?—A. No ; I would let them take their own risk. Q. What was the opinion of the people of Prince Edward Island, as º as you know %–A. When it was passed, of course it was against them. Q. What was 2—A. That is to pay the duty. Of course when we bought fish we had to figure the $2 in. If fish were selling for $5 in Boston, of course we had to take the $2 out of that. 2852 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Suppose the Washington Treaty hadn’t passed, and you had gone along with the duty, how much longer would it have taken to use up the business of selling mackerel in the United States from the island?— A. I don’t know ; it is pretty hard to tell that. We are in business, and cannot wind it up in a day or a year, especially the Way I was situated, because I have to supply my men ahead all the time. If the duty were to be $2 or $5 next year, I could not help it. They are supplied for next year. The men I have are, two-thirds of them, men with families, that ive right in Rustico. I have to supply them all winter. Q. They are always indebted to you ?—A. Yes. Q. You are satisfied you had to pay the duty when it was paid 2–A. Certainly. Q. Didn’t you get it back 3–A. Not I. By Mr. Davies: - Q. You have been at Rustico before the Washington Treaty and car- ried on your business all the time the $2 duty was paid, and have car- ried it on ever since %—A. Yes. Q. Taking the last six years, have the fisheries largely increased in Prince Edward Island 7–A. For the last six years? Weli, I don’t really think they have. Q. What part of the island do you speak of When you say they haven’t 3–A. Just where I am. - Q. I don’t mean your own business.-A. I mean in Rustico. I can’t answer for anything else. Q. Are not larger boats being built 2—A. Yes. Q. And more of them 3–A. Yes. Q. That is what I mean.—A. I thought you asked if the catch had been bigger. - Q. I mean that more people have gone into it 2–A. Yes. Q. And more money has been invested in it 3—A. Yes. Q. As to the catch, of course you can’t tell what the catch was ?—A. No. Q. I want to show that the fisheries increased, and more money was invested and more people engaged, although a duty of $2 a barrel was imposed.—A. At the time the duty was put on it was pretty blue. Q. And for the two or three years the duty remained on, do you mean to say that more people didn’t go into it 3–A. I don’t think it. Q. Since then there have 3—A. I think so. Q. You don’t know what the increase was then, or whether there was any 3–A. No. . * Q. Would you say there was none 3 Could you state that ?—A. No ; I could not. * = Q. You have a strong interest in this $2 duty, haven’t you ?—A. I have. Q. Have you a large claim, about five or six thousand dollars?—A. About half of that. - Q. I have the statement here from the petition in relation to that. It is $4,999 marked against you.-A. I am glad it is so much ; I thought it was about $3,000. Q. When you applied to get the duty refunded, you felt that you should get it back?—A. Yes. Q. Of course you naturally felt that that should be paid to you ?—A. Yes. - Q. Now didn’t you buy fish as well as catch them ?—A. Yes. Q. Didn’t you buy them with the knowledge that the duty would be refunded ?–A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2853 Q. And you paid $2 more than you otherwise would have done 7–A. Yes. I didn’t buy many. Q. I refer to what you did buy.—A. Yes. Q. Have you thought over this question of the duty, whether the con- Sumer pays it?—A. I gave it up long ago. Q. Who do you think paid the duty on the potatoes we shipped last year from the island 7–A. It is no use to ask me that. Q. Who do you think?—A. Potatoes are one thing and fish another. Q. I Want to see if the same principle does not govern both.-A. It is merely guess-work, anything I should say. Q. We got a price large enough to pay the duty º–A. Potatoes are different. There are a large fleet of American fishermen catching mack- erel. What fish we catch is like a drop in the bucket there. Q. Have you studied the statistics upon that point to see ?—A. That is my idea. - - Q. Do you know what proportion of the whole quantity consumed by the people of the United States comes from this country 3—A. I don’t know anything about it. Q. Then when you say it is a mere drop in the bucket you are speak- ing at random 7—A. I know it. I know there are 600 or 800 sail of ves- sels. All I know is that when I send mackerel to the Boston market, it is what the American fleet gets that governs our prices. Q. You are getting high prices this year?—A. Yes. º the failure of the American fleet anything to do with that ?— A. Yes. Q. When the price goes up beyond a certain point, who pays the duty then 3–A. Well, that is what I think. If the American fleet catches a great many mackerel, we get a small price. Q. I think you stated with reference to the vessel-fishing that it is about three miles off they fish, and that they fish inside and outside 3– A. Yes. - - --- Q. That is what I supposed. Now, on the boat-fishing we are, I think, a little at variance, that is, you and the witnesses I have called. You know Ross %–A. Yes. w Q. He does business alongside of you?—A. Yes; he is a good Square Iſla, Il. * Q. A man of thorough integrity ?—A. He is an honest man. Q. A man you would believe?—A. Yes; a first class-man. Q. Now, there is another point I want to refer to in this connection. You don’t go in boats yourself?—A. No; I have never been out all SUIII) Iſle T. - Q. So that men who actually do go would have a better knowledge of the particular locality where the fishing was done than you could 3– A. Yes; but I know where the boats are better than they do them- Selves. Q. How do you know that ?—A. Because I am awake and they are asleep half the time. Each one of them may know where he is himself, but I know where the whole of them are. Q. And you think they don’t know %–A. Each boat may know for himself, but I can see better than they can. Q. You mean that, looking from the shore, you are apt to form a dif- ferent opinion from those in the boats?—A. Yes. Q. Don't you think that the man who goes out would have a better Opinion than the man on shore ?—A. Not as to where they lie. Q. Ross gives his opinion that nine-tenths of the mackerel caught by the boat fishermen are taken within three miles?—A.. I don’t think it. 2854 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Alexander McNeil, who is he 3—A. He is a good man. Q. He is a justice of the peace?—A. Yes. Q. Of good standing and integrity ?—A. First class. Q. Well, he has been fishing a good many years. He is a farmer and fisherman 2–A. Yes. - Q. He has been actively engaged since 1851, and he says the fish caught by the boats are taken (see statement in evidence).-A. That is at Cavendish. * - Q. That would be correct there ?–A. He has a boat that is not longer than this table. They have nothing but dories and skiffs. They haul their boats on the beach on the rocks. We could not do that with our boats. We have different boats altogether. Those Cavendish men come down to Rustico and fish in our boats. Q. Then he does catch fish in that close ?—A. Yes; I have no doubt his ºatements are true as to Cavendish. It is bolder water, to begin With. Q. How far from Rustico is it?—A. Two or three miles, Q. William J. McNeill, the member—you know him 7––A. Yes. Q. He is a respectable man 7–A. He is a good man. Q. He is of the same opinion. Now, I will take the months of July and August—do you think the fishing is done within three miles in those months º–A. I do. Q. Well within Ż–A. Yes. t Q. Then, in the fall, the boats go out more ?—A. Yes. Q. Is it not the fact that they catch both inside and outside during the fall ?—A. Certainly. - Q. Part is taken inside and part outside 3–A. Yes. Q. You don’t know the proportion ?—A. No ; but generally they go Out. They expect to go out in the fall. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. About the middle of September, for instance; is that a time when they go out or in 3—A. They go off then—off shore. w Q. Do they fish inside much about that time 2—A. Not much. The years are different; but they are always prepared to go outside. No. 71. ISAAC C. HALL, of Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, and Win- throp, Mass., fish merchant, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. IBy Mr. Foster: Question. You are a citizen of the United States ?—Answer. Yes. Q. You have a house in Charlottetown 2–A. A commercial house; yes. \ $ Q. And you live part of the year at Charlottetown and part of the year at Winthrop, Mass., near Boston, Suffolk County 2—A. Yes. Q: How old are you?—A. Fifty-seven. Q. How many years have you been engaged in the fishing business on Prince Edward Island 7–A. This is the twentieth year. It will be 20 years next Spring. - Q. Since the spring of 1858 what portion of each season have you spent on Prince Edward Island 2—A. I should think about 9 months in the year. - - Q. Have you been there through the winter so far ”—A. I have spent Six years there pretty nearly all the time—part of the winter. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2855 ! Q. Where did you reside the first year on the island 2–A. Cascum- peque, or rather Alberton, Cascumpeque Harbor. Q. Since then you have resided at Charlottetown 3–A. Yes. Q. Now, you have been in the fishing business, how have you prose- cuted it'—A. I have been engaged, owning and fitting out vessels, and boat-fishing, and I have been purchasing mackerel from the first. Q. Have you had any stages anywhere ?—A. Yes. Q. Where ?—A. You mean the firm * Q. I don’t want to ask you as to those that have been in charge of your partner, but how many have you had charge of yourself —A. I have had charge of three. One at Rustico. Q. How long have you had that ?—A. Seven years. Q. What others?—A. One on Grand River, near Georgetown, about ten miles east of it, on the south side of the island, and another at Cape George, Nova Scotia. - Q. When you began to do business on Prince Edward Island, it was about three years after the Reciprocity Treaty went into effect. Was there much fishing done then by the inhabitants 2—A. There was very little. It was in its infancy. s Q. Did they know how to take care of the fish they caught, to cure them for market 2—A. No ; it was sufficient to condemn fish in the Boston market, so far as bringing good prices was concerned, that they came from Prince Edward Island. That was the case previous to 1858. Q. Do you know how many barrels of mackerel were sent this year from yourself and your partner to Boston º–A. I don’t know that I can give it exactly. I may approximate it. Only part of the catch has been shipped. Q. Do you know what the catch has been of yourself and your part- ner up to the present time—whether it is still in hand or going for- Ward 3–A. Do you wish to ask what quantity I am shipping or what is the extent of the catch 3 - Q. What number of barrels of mackerel do your firm take, in the first place, and then what do they buy ?—A. The shipment will probably amount this year to something like 7,000 or 8,000 barrels. - Q. How much last year 3–A. Can I refer to memoranda. ? Q. Certainly.—A. Our whole receipts last year were 4,534 barrels in Boston; about 300 were sent to Halifax; in all, 4,834 barrels. Q. How much opportunity have you had to observe where the mack- erel-boats fish off Prince Edward Island, and where the mackerel-ves- sels fish 7–A. My observations this summer. I have been at Rustico a great part of the time, and I have had a chance to observe the places where they fish, and have taken some notice, more than I have hereto- fore. I have been buying fish since I went on the island, more or less, and have a general idea, but nothing very accurate. In regard to boat- fishing in Rustico, they fish in the early part of the season quite near the shore, from one and a half to two and a half miles, and later in the season, when the fish begin to move south, they have to go wide out for them. «y * * Q. What do you mean by “wide out " ?—A. From four to eight miles. Q. Take last month, run back to the middle of September or the first week in September; within what distance from the shore were they fish- ing 2—A. We have been fishing wide out. We have caught no fish Within four or five miles. Q. You sent Mr. Davies some mackerel the other day; how far out were those caught 7–A. I answered that question before. Q. What has the quality of mackerel been this year at the island 3– 2856 k AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. A. We have had some very fine fish—a few, but the majority have been poor, very similar to 1874, when we got such a large catch. - Q. The boat catch has been how good this year 2–A. It has been good—more than an average. Q. But the average quality has been poor 7—A. Yes. * Q. Is that usually the case when the boat catch has been large %–A. Well, we never get a large catch with boats unless they are poor; that is a very large catch I am speaking of now. A very large catch involves small and poor fish. The average quality of the catch has not been good this year, although the quantity has been large. I have at Rus- tico ten boats, and we have taken 1,250 barrels, that is, 125 to a boat. That is an average. Some of them have got 150, and some down to 100. I think the first shipment amounted to 708 barrels. Over 650 of them Were poor—number 3. I call all fish that will go to number 2 fat. Q. You have a table %–A. I have a table of the percentage of fat and poor mackerel from 1868 down to 1876. Shall I read it * Q. If you please.—A. This is a table of the whole quantity that our firm received : t # Statement of mackerel received by Hall, Myrick & Co., Boston, 1868 to 1876, inclusive. d’ d’ dj 80 êſ) bſ) cº Sº . cº . -- a +: ; ; --> * Year. No. 1. | No. 2. No. 3. Total. §§ § 3 5 s $3 º fi $22, Q QX Ç ſh- ſh- P- 1868 -------------------------------. 6, 639 1, 320% 2, 282 8, 188 97 3 79 1869 -------------------------------- 2, 31.4% 3, 657% 2,047 8,019 75 25 29 1870 ------------------------ - - - - - - - - 2,885 3, 770 779; 7,434% 89% 10% 38 1871 -------------------------------- 756; 4, 635; 8, 898; 14, 290; 38 62 5 1873 -------------------------------- 2,029#| 2,655 1, 861 | 6, 5454 71 29 31 1873 -------------------------------- 2, 286 2,052 1, 474; 5,812; 75 25 39 1874------------------------, ------- 3, 439;| 7, 841 6, 710 || 17, 997; 63 37 19 1875 ------------------------- ** s m = s is is 1, 590 4,436; 4, 129 10, 155; 59 41 16 1876 -------------------------------- 1, 827; 1, 506; 1, 200 4, 534 73. 27 40 Q. That table brings you to this year? Now, what proportion of those Were taken in boats and what proportion in vessels?—A. It is pretty hard to make an estimate without going to the books. I haven’t pre- pared myself for it. Q. You can explain how many vessels you have.—A. The greatest number we fitted out was in 1871, when I had 8 vessels. Q. How many have you had since that ?—A.. I don’t think I have had Over two since then. Q. You can tell in round numbers whether three-fourths or seven. eighths is about the vessels' catch 3—A. Taking the whole time together there may have been one-eighth vessel catch. / º Q. But, of late years, since 1871, would more than seven-eighths be boat catch 3—A. Yes, sir; nearly all. There have only been a few ves- Sels out since then. Q. Have you been inspector of mackerel on the island?—A. Yes, sir. Q. You inspect your own mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. When your mackerel goes to Boston is it required to be inspected?— A. No. Q. It is repacked and reinspected ?–A. To some extent the people who buy it put it in smaller packages to suit their own convenience. Q. But it is not necessarily reinspected ?–A. No. Q. And unless it is reinspected in that way your mackerel would not go into the Massachusetts inspection figures 2—A. No, they don’t put foreign mackerel into their report. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2857 Q. Now, I have asked you where the boats have fished; I want to ask you so far as your observation extends whether the vessels fish in the Same places as the boats or further out 2—A. I think the vessels fish more off shore than the boats do. te Q. Have you made any observations this year, or looked to see where the vessels were fishing?—A. I have been watching the vessels since I have been at Rustico this summer. , ſº Q. You told me of some instances in which you made a count 2—A. That was at Cape George. I was there, and from the house I counted With the glass some 31 vessels fishing. Q. How far off were they 7–A. Well, most of them were wide out. ‘I counted three, I think, that were as I considered inside of the three- mile limit. Q. Now, I see there is a Mr. Curry, a gentleman, on your island, I believe, is not he?—A. Yes. Q. He reports you as having estimated the catch of mackerel in the bay as being one-third inside of three miles and two-thirds outside. Did you give any such estimate and under what circumstances; and does that correspond with your present belief?—A. I recollect Mr. Curry com- ing in and asking me about the fishing in the bay, and I gave him my best judgment. - Q. When was that ?—A. Several years ago, I think. My attention º been called to it here. It was 1873, I think. I cannot recollect ex- actly. - Q. What do you say about that?—A. I gave him my opinion to the best of my judgment as I thought at that time. My opinion in regard to distance is not of course equal to that of men who have been on the Sea all their lives catching mackerel. I have merely been around the Shores and conversed with the captains who have been fishing for me. Q. Where do your captains belong 2—A. To the island, most of them. Q. What do you now say as to the distance that the vessels fish from the shore off the bend of the island * Do they fish in where the boats do or further off?—A. They are sometimes in where the boats are, but generally further out. Q. Is the boat fishing and vessel fishing the same kind?—A. No. Q. Explain the difference.—A. The boat goes from the shore and brings the fish to the stage, and has them dressed on shore, as a gen- eral thing. Some boats go out and stay three or four days from the north part of the island. My boats make two trips a day in the sum- mer, and in the fall they make one trip, the men taking their dinners with them. The fish are all brought ashore and dressed ashore, and my boats all fish on the half line or quarter line. Q. Now, can the vessels with a crew of 12 or 14 or 16 men get a prof- itable catch of mackerel if they fish in where your boats do that make two trips a day ? What do you say about that?—A.. I don’t know that my opinion would be worth anything on that point. I never had any ex- perience in the matter. There are some years I think they would. Other years they would not. Q. As a matter of observation, do they usually fish as far in as the boats do 2–A. They don’t. They fish further out. - i Q. If you were to estimate again as to the proportion of mackerel Caught within three miles of the shore by the vessels, would you con- sider two-thirds a large or small estimate %–A. If I was to estimate by conversation with the men I have seen here from the States, I should consider that a very large estimate. If I took my estimate from those who have been fishing for me, and have been giving testimony before 2858 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. you here, I should say it was a very small one. I don’t think my opin- ion would be worth much. . Q. You were in business on the island at the time the Reciprocity Treaty ended?—A. I was. - Q. What was the effect of the abrogation of the treaty upon your business?—A. The treaty was abrogated, I think, in 1866. We had to pay duties on mackerel from 1866 down to 1870. From 1866 to 1868 we had a very superior quality of fish, as you will see by the estimate I have given you here. The prices were high, and we got good fish, and were enabled to do very well until the close of the year 1870 or the beginning of 1871, when the market completely broke down and we lost everything, you may say. It was in 1870 that the raid was made on us there from the Dominion Government, and that, coupled with the fall of the mack- erel, was a very heavy loss to us. Then, in 1870 we had a very large catch of mackerel, but of poor quality, and, having to pay duties, our mackerel netted us very little. I have an estimate of the exact amount of what they netted us that year. The net sales of No. 1 were $7.31 in 1871; No. 2, $4.81; and No. 3, which is the largest portion, $3.44. The average for the year was $4.09, at which we sold 14,289 barrels. Q. What caused that fall?—A. There was a very large catch in 1870 on the American coast, and the market completely broke down at the close of the season. Q. They had a pretty large catch the year preceding and a good deal was carried over ?—A. Yes. A large part of the catch of 1870 was con- sumed before our fish came in in 1871. Our prices fell from $23 or $24 a barrel down to $7. We had very heavy stocks and it completely crushed us. - Q. What part did you take in getting the fishery clause of the Wash- ington Treaty enacted ?–A. Well, I had a very large interest in it. Of course, I went on at the time the resolutions were being got up from the city of Boston recommending that the bill should pass. I wanted free fish and free fishing. Q. You met, your Gloucester friends taking the other view 2–A.. I met Mr. Procter, who was one of the delegates from Gloucester, with others. He had charge of them and seemed to be the leading man. There was a gentleman from Cape Cod. I labored with him a good deal, and tried to have my view accepted. Q. You finally beat him 7–A. Well, I would not say I beat them, but my plan was successful. Q. What was the opinion of the people of Prince Edward Island as to the effect upon their fishing interests of the clauses of the Washing- ton Treaty 3–A. I have never seen any one that was interested in the fishery, either actually engaged or, otherwise, but what, so far as the fishing interest was concerned, looked upon it as a great boon, Worth anything to the fishing business. Q. After the repeal of the Reciprocity Treaty, and before the fishing clauses of the Washington Treaty took effect, were you able to add the duty of $2 a barrel, or any part of it, to your fish, or did it come out of you as a fish-seller 3—A. I always supposed, and still believe, we had to take it out of the fish. There was pretty good evidence of that in 1871; when it came out there was not much left. - Q. If the duty were reimposed upon mackerel going from the island to the United States, what effect would it have on your business %–A. It Would have a very disastrous effect. We could not carry it on with the ordinary price to make it a success. Q. Explain that matter. Explain your views to the Commission.—A. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2859 Well, whenever there is a large catch of mackerel on the American Shores, a thing which happens once in six or seven years, the prices go down invariably. In 1870, owing to the large quantity of mackerel caught on the United States shores, the prices went down. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. At what time of the year did the break in the prices take place 3—A. It commenced about the December of 1870. We had to meet that dis- aster, and the consequence was that in 1871 we had to sell our mackerel at One-half of what it cost. In 1874 they had a great catch there, but this was after we had free trade, of course. We had to meet a very low price, and not having the duty to pay, we sustained ourselves and made a decent thing of it. We caught a large quantity of fish. The largest Quantity ever caught was that year. By Mr. Davies: s Q. I think you are wrong about that year.—A. The catch on the American coast was in 1870, the great catch. But they also had a pretty. large catch the following year, and we had a large catch also. It fol- lows almost invariably that whenever they have a very large catch on the American shore we get a large part of those same fish the next year. It followed in the same way. Now, in 1874 they had a pretty large Catch, and We had a very large catch. There was not as many mackerel in the gulf, but they were all inshore, and we made the largest catch ever made. In 1876, last year, our catch was very small. It was the poorest year we ever had. We had not only a poor catch, but poor prices, as we had to contend with a great catch on the American shore. We had a small catch and they had a large catch, and the re-, sult was that prices were very low, and of course it was a very disas- trous year for Prince Edward Island—as much so as any previous to 1871. - By Mr. Foster : Q. Now, how large a quantity of high-priced mackerel, say, No. 1's, will the United States market take in a year 2—A. I can tell how many No. 1's. Q. Take it at $20 a barrel, how many barrels would the United States market ordinarily take 3—A. It is now very unlike what it was ten years ago; that is, the market for mackerel. Then we had a winter trade, how we have none. The fact is no business man has now any faith in a winter Warket. Q. What becomes of the people who hold mackerel over usually ?— A. It is a losing business. It has been losing for several years. For- merly it was not so. t Q. You say the market is very different; what has caused the differ- ence %—A. I have no doubt in my own mind it is the very large intro- duction of fresh fish into the country, caught through the winter, and the great production of the Western lakes. That is the principal thing. Q. But of the fact there is, no doubt, that is, of the limitation of the mackerel market 2—A. No doubt. It was easier to sell 200,000 ten years ago than 100,000 to-day. Q. Now, you take No. 3 mackerel, what would be the effect of a duty of $2 a barrel in the United States market 2—A. We could not catch them and ship them there ordinarily unless there was a great Scarcity there, as happens this season. Q. Practically what would become of your business of catching mack- erel if the duty of $2 a barrel were reimposed ?–A. Well, when a man runs his head against a post he must get around the best way he can. 28.60 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. You are satisfied you could not add the duty to the price of the mackerel in the United States market 2—A. No, it can’t be done. Q. How low must mackerel be to have a large quantity taken in the American market & At what price does the willingness to purchase begin to decidedly fall ?—A. When No. 3 go up over $8 a barrel, and No. 2 over $10, and No. 1 over $14, the market begins to drop. The Consumption falls off very much indeed. Q. Now, you didn't answer how many barrels of mess mackerel, or Very fine No. 1's, could be disposed of at $20 a barrel ?—A. Well, mess mackerel is a very small percentage, not more than 3 per cent. of the mackerel consumed. Looking at the papers to-day, I see we received, from 1868 to 1876, of mess mackerel, including No. 1 and No. 2 mess mackerel, we received in nine years 3,097 barrels in a total receipt of mackerel of 145,980. - - Q. Can you sell this mackerel in Canada. ? Is there any Canadian market 2—A. No. I went through Canada and went through all the cities and large places, and spent a long time one winter. - Q. How far west did you go?—A. As far as Toronto. I sold a few half barrels and kits altogether, a dozen to some parties. I thought we could introduce them and I shipped them one or two different lots. They Sold a few, a very few, and I finally reshipped them to Detroit and closed them up. The people didn’t know much about them, and didn't Care much about them. Q. The boat fisheries of Prince Edward Island have increased and flourished very much for the last few years 2—A. Yes, very much. They have good reasons for it. --> * Q. What reasons?—A. A better class of fishermen. When we first started business we had, of course, to work with green hands. Like every other business, it has to be learned, and men have to be prepared for it. Then when the duties were put on, the best fishermen left us and Went aboard American vessels. They could ship from the island or go to Gloucester and get good vessels and have their fish go into the United States and sell for their whole value. We had no other market, and had inferior men. Now, since we have a free market, these men have been coming back. The character of the men and their ability to fish has increased very much. So much so that I honestly think you Can Calculate the catch of the same number of men now at 25 to 33 per cent, more than it was formerly. Q. To what do you attribute this greater supply of boat fishermen and better quality ?–A. These men find they can fish here. This is their home in many cases. A great many get boats and find they can . Very Well here now fishing, and they stock at home and fish from the SIl CTO. Q. Now, if the island were cut off from the United States market, What Would become of the fishermen 2–A. Well, these fishermen would probably go back to their old business. I would not want to fish if I had to pay the duty on mackerel. Q. Your codfish don’t go much to the United States market, at pres- ent”—A. No. Very little. . . Q. You cure them for the West Indies 2—A. The small fish are cured for the West India market, and the large fish are either consumed at home or sent to Halifax. Q. If you were going to pursue the vessel mackerel-fishing from Prince Edward Island would you require pogies as a necessary bait 2– A. We never think of sending a vessel without pogies. Q. How is it that your boats get along with herring and make fair AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2861 catches when the vessels can’t 2—A. Well, it has been somewhat of a mystery to us all, but we make it work. - Q. What is the difference between boat and vessel fishing 2—A. Well, the boat goes off and comes to anchor and springs up, and they com- mence to throw the bait over. By Mr. Dana : - Q. Springing up means coming broadside to the tide?—A. Yes. They throw the bait and the tide takes it away, and they keep feeding it out and gathering the fish around them all day; and although they may not have a large quantity of fish they make a decent business of it. Whereas . a vessel can’t do the same thing. They heave to most of the time and drift. - By Mr. Foster: Q. If you were going to pursue vessel-fishing would you make any use of Seines?—A. The Seines don’t seem to be as favorable with us as they were. - Q. Have seines been made successful in the gulf?—A. I have had two mackerel seiners there. One wore out, and the other half wore out and I sold it. - Q. To what do you attribute the fact that seining in the gulf does not seem to be a success %–A. To the shoal water and rough bottom. Q. What do you say about making a shoal Seine 3—A. My Seine was a shoal Seine, made expressly for the bottom. Three times out of four ... you get foul of rocks and a hole is made, and away goes the mackerel. Q. Suppose the three-mile limit were distinctly marked out by a line of buoys so that anybody could see it, and there was no danger of making a mistake as to it, would the right of fishing within three miles of the shore be worth to the United States vessels three dollars a ton Ž —A. Well, I don’t think many would take it. There are very few ves- sels coming here now when they have free access to the shores. If they had to pay a dollar a ton I think it would be very seldom they would come. There might be times when it would be different, because they know by telegraph when there is a good run of mackerel, and When the gulf is full they might come down, but ordinarily they would not. Q. To what do you attribute the apparently great importance of this three-mile concession ?—A. I think the great importance of it is this: that when sometimes a man sends a vessel down here it is a valuable property, and they have to trust it to their captains. A mistake in re- gard to the line might involve them in any amount of trouble. Any captain of a vessel if he was four or five miles Out Would make out to sea if he was fishing and a cruiser came along, and it was unsafe to go even within that distance of shore, because you could not tell certainly as to the distance. No man can tell unless he has instruments. He may be 25 or 50 per cent. out of the way. Q. Whether by mistake of the skipper, or by mistake of the cruiser, whether intentionally or unintentionally, if a man’s vessel is seized what is the effect 7–A. It does not make a great deal of difference whether he is guilty or not. It amounts pretty much to the same thing, so far as my experience goes. The business is broken up and the men thrown out of employment for the season. Everything is gone, and the vessel is laid up six months, eaten up by the worms. You might get your VeS- Sel back, but you would not get 60 per cent. of the value of her on the VOyage. - Q. How much do you pay for mackerel to your fishermen 7–A. Do 2862 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. you mean my boats? I pay $1.50 a hundred for their portion of the fish, delivered on the stage. We drèss them and do all the work. Q. Let us have the biggest and lowest price you pay them.—A. I have paid within three or four years $2.00 to $1.25. $1.50 is the aver- age. rºw - - Q. You say that is for their part of the fish. What do you mean 7– A. I find them the boat, lines, bait, provisions, and everything that be- longs to the fishing. They have no expense. They catch their fare and bring them into the harbor and we take account of them. We allow him $1.50 a hundred for half the fish. The other half is ours. You wanted to know how many we take for the barrel. * Q. I didn’t come to that. Have you a copy of the agreement 3–A, (Produces and reads agreement.) Q. That is before it is cured ?–A. That is for fresh fish landed on the Stage. - Q. Now, being paid at that rate, how much can a man earn in a month ?–A." In a good season he will earn from $20 to $25; in a poor season from $12 to $15. • * Q. I don’t think I asked you about the size of the boats. If there are boats of different sizes that fish in different ways, I would like you to tell ?—A. We have large boats, with five men to a boat. Q. How long are those 3–A. From 22 to 25 feet keel. Q. How long do they stay out 7 Do they stay over night?—A. Not my boats. The men all sleep ashore. - Q. What is the size of the smaller boats 3—A. A great many little boats fish all round the island; some quite small, perhaps 12 or 15 feet keel. Q. Are Some owned by farmer fishermen 2–A. Yes. Q. Do you buy fish from them 2–A. Yes. A great many of them ship their Own fish. Q. Through you ?—A. Yes, sometimes. Q. And get the benefit of the market 2—A. Yes. Q. That is getting general. Is that a branch of industry that has been built up since the fishery clauses of the treaty went into effect 3– A. It has been very much built up within the last few years. It has been done by dozens of men that formerly sold us their fish. Q. You have given us a description of what is called half-line fishing; what is quarter-line fishing?—A. That is where the fisherman receives a specified sum per month, and gives the owner one-fourth of the fish for that sum ; the owner thus receiving three-fourths of his catch. Q. You find them in food?—A. Yes, everything. They have no ex- pense, except for their own clothing. Q. Do you mean that you board them for the month 3–A. We find a building for them, and have a cook-house. They sleep, eat, and every- thing. They have no expense. - Q. Have you examined the Prince “Edward Island statistics at my request ?—A. I have. e Q. Have you read the testimony of your partner, Mr. Myrick, as to them?—A.. I did. - \ Q. You know what he testified ?–A. Yes. Q. How does your judgment correspond with his in reference to the correctness or incorrectness of those island statistics 2—A. I think he is very nearly correct. - Q. Are there any particulars in which you would correct his state- Wºº. Well, I might if I had the details, but as a general thing I WOuld not. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2863 Q. Well, there is one particular in which, probably by an error either of the reporter or of the printer, there is a considerable difference be- tween his statement and the one you gave me ; what is that %–A. That is in regard to hake-fishing. It was placed on the list at $3.50 a quin- tal. That was a mistake of a dollar. Q. Did you call his attention to that?—A. He said it was a mistake. He gave it, $2.50. ; Q. Are there any hake sounds exported from the island 2–A. Yes. Q. There are no hake sounds down in the book 3–A. They have got down cod sounds. There are 594 barrels of cod tongues and Sounds down. He said he had no such thing. Q. You say that is not correct 3–A. Certainly not. I think it is in- tended for hake sounds. Q. Are there that many hake sounds?—A. I don’t think there is Such a large amount. Q. What become of the cod sounds?—A. They are thrown away with the offal of the fish. Our cod are mostly small. I never saw a barrel of cod sounds saved on the island. Q. At what do you estimate the exportation of mackerel for 1876 from the island?—A. Not exceeding 12,000 barrels. Q. Would there be consumed on the island as much more of mack- erel?—A. We do not eat mackerel on the island. Q. In regard to fresh fish : have you much of a market for fresh fish there ?—A. We have a market in Charlottetown; we sell fifty barrels a year there. - § Q. Has anybody else a market there ?—A. No ; farmers come in on market days and sell fish. Q. How many inhabitants has Charlottetown 2–A. About 9,000. Q. And the only place where fish is sold, except from Wagons on market days, disposes of fifty barrels a year. Farmers catch it for their own use, I suppose"—A. I think they do ; they are not a mack- erel-eating people. I do not sell on an average, in Charlottetown, five barrels of cured mackerel a year. Q. Any estimate placing the production of salted mackerel at 20,000 for last year, you think, is absurdly erroneous 3–A. It is erroneous ; there is no question about it. By Mr. Davies: Q. How do you arrive at the quantity exported from the island; you have to make a guess at it 2–A. We cannot get the exact amount be- cause we have no statistics we can depend on ; we have our exports to go by ; So far as they go they are correct, but they do not cover the whole quantity; there is only 9,000 reported as exported. Q. You think that is not a correct statement, and that it exceeds that amount 2—A. I think there are about 2,000 barrels more exported. Q. That is to say, you are guessing at the amount 7–A. I cannot give the exact amount, but I can approximate very nearly to it; I know what we receive and what our neighbors receive; I know every man who does any mackerel business on the island, and as I know about the number of barrels they ship, I can get at it very nearly. Q. You never set to work to make up such a statement 3–A. Not to get it exactly to a barrel. Q. You never attempted to do so?—A. I never attempted it. Q. As to the quantity of mackerel consumed on the island : you never made any inquiry, I suppose, in the fishing districts to ascertain what Quantity of No. 3's the people consumed, or whether it is got the habit 2864. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. of the people to keep some portion of the mackerel for their own con- Sumption ?–A. I know something about that because I am familiar with the fishermen on all parts of the island, and also the farmers. Q. Fishermen and farmers ?—A. They use large quantities of herring and a considerable quantity of codfish in all parts of the island. I have often heard them say they would rather have a barrel of herring than a barrel of mackerel. Q. Nó doubt because herring is cheaper ?—A. They are accustomed to eat herring, and not accustomed to mackerel. Q. You would not put your statement against that of a person who had gone round and made an examination among the farmers and fish- ermen as to the quantity consumed ?–A. If he went round among the people and farmers to inquire as to the quantity, I would not ; but my general information would give me the idea that they do not consume many mackerel. - * Q. But not having made any inquiry for the purpose, you would not place your estimate as against that of a man who had made an inquiry as to the quantity consumed 3–A. I don’t believe any man could make out what the quantity is. Q. You have no doubt the sounds spoken of in the statistics are hake sounds 2 We do not classify any sounds as hake sounds in the statis- tics of the island 3—A. I think so, though the price is entered as per barrel, and hake sounds are sold by the pound, being a very valuable article. There cannot be any doubt but that is a mistake. Q. When they put down cod sounds they meant hake sounds 2—A. I don’t know what they meant. Q. Would you say they were cod sounds 2—A. No ; but the price should not have been put in by the barrel. Hake sounds are worth fifty cents, sometimes $1 per pound. Q. Is the value stated correctly, or is it an undervaluation ?–A. If they are cod sounds, it is a high value ; if hake sounds, it is a very Small part of their value. Q. You have already told the Commission that it is within your knowl- edge they are not cod sourids, and I accept your statement as correct.— A. Yes. a Q. If they are hake sounds they are undervalued?—A. Undervalued very much. Q. You think that is a large number of barrels of hake sounds 7–A. Rather large. Q. They form a very valuable part of the fish, more valuable than the hake itself?—A. Far more valuable. - Q. I did not quite understand you with respect to people mistaking distances. Do you think it is easy for a man to mistake the distance he is from shore ?—A. My experience is that when we are approaching the shore with a vessel we are very apt to think we are within perhaps half a mile of the shore when we are more than a mile away. It is very difficult to decide the distance you are from shore from a vessel's deck. That has been my experience, and I have heard a good many men express the same Opinion. Q. Is there not the same difficulty in looking out from the land 2—A. Perhaps it would not be so difficult. Different phases of the ocean would give different appearances. More experienced men would know more about it. Q. You are head of the fishing establishment of Hall & Myrick?— A. Yes. Q. Your headquarters are at Charlottetown 2–A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2865 Q. When you are on the island, do you not reside nine-tenths of your time in Charlottetown 3–A. I spend a large portion of the time there; I don't know about nine-tenths. That is my headquarters. Q. If I was to say you spend one day out of two weeks at Rustico, Would I be wrong"—A. I spent this summer half my time there. Q. But generally speaking 3—A. I spend all the Sabbaths and about half the week there. - Q. Do you not generally live in Charlottetown when on the island 7– A. I generally go to Rustico two or three times a week. I remain there but a short time. e Q. Your opportunities of observation in regard to the fishing there Were limited compared with those of persons on the spot?—A. Of course. Q. You would not pretend to give an opinion as to the distance the boats fished from the shore, as against the opinions of persons on the Spot ?—A. I have only been there one season, but I have been round the island for twenty years. . Captain Chivirie is one of your captains 3–A. Yes. And also Captain James McDonald 7–A. Yes. . Was their evidence put in your hands to read by Mr. Foster ?—A. Yes. . You read their statements?—A. Yes. James McDonald is now captain of the Lettie 7–A. He is now. Is he out fishing this year 7—A. Yes. Is he a good fisherman 2–A. Yes, a good fisherman. He says: That two-thirds of the fish caught in American and other schooners are caught .." a mile and one-half from the shore; the best-fishing is generally close to the SITOI'ê. You would not be prepared to contradict his statement 3–A.. I have not the same opinion he has. From what I know from conversations with other men, and from my conversations with him in former times, I should not have such an opinion. Q. I understood you to say, in answer to Mr. Foster, that your opinions had been modified by conversation with American witnesses since you came here?—A. Not so much here; partly here and partly at other places. Q. I understood you to say that, since you came here and conversed with American witnesses, you had somewhat modified your opinion ?— A. If I had formed my opinion from conversations with them, it would be that not more than one-eighth or one-tenth of the catch was taken inshore; if from conversations with the other side, it would be that two- thirds, three-quarters, or nearly all was so taken. Q. Did you ever converse with witnesses from the island about it 7– A. I have talked with them in various years oftentimes. - Q. You have no reason to doubt that James McDonald is a reliable man 7–A. I have good reason to doubt. Q. As to his veracity ?—A. No ; I would not doubt any man's verac- ity, but the correctness of his opinion. Q. You merely doubt his estimate 3—A. I doubt the estimate in re- gard to the American fleet. Q. Not his integrity and veracity ?—No. Q. You spoke of seining ; what was the depth of the seine with which you tried ?–A. I had one of 10 fathoms deep, and another of 12 fathoms. Q. You found they required to be so shallow in order to prosecute the fishing there?—A. Yes. § : 180 F 2866 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Did McDonald use the seine in the Lettie 3–A. No. Q. Who used them, and on what part of the coast were they used ?– A. The purse-Seine I had with Captain Rogers, of Massachusetts. He fished along the coast, in the bend of the island, and back and forth round the island shores. Afterwards I had a Seine with, Captain Mar. Shall. Q. Did he fish round the island 7–A. The year he caught fish he took them over at Gaspé Harbor. e Q. You say that in 1874 all the fish were taken inshore; I mean, of course, a very large part of them?—A. I said the fish were very near the shore in 1874, more so than I ever knew them. - Q. Some of the witnesses have stated that there has been a tendency of the fish to frequent the shores of late years. Have you noticed that the fish have been taken closer to the shore of late years than in 1855 or 1860?—A. I think the fish vary from year to year; I could not ex- press a general opinion on that point. I believe the vessels of the islaud fish nearer the island than the American vessels, and follow our coast more closely; I believe that has led to the impression that the fishing is So much inshore. # t--, Q. Were not Banks Bradley and Orphan formerly known as great fishing places 3–A. They have not been able to take many fish anywhere during the last three years. The American fleet that has come down has been a small fleet, and they have taken very few. Q. Are not most of the American vessels furnished with Seines this year?—A. Pretty much all on the American coast. Q. And here 7–A. A good many, a large number. Q. You have stated that seining has not been a success with us?—A. It has not been profitable either to American vessels or those fishing from the island. - - Q. But most of the fleet have seines this year?—A. I could not give the proportion of the fleet which has come to the bay with Seines. I counted ten vessels with Seines. Q. Would you say that one-half of the vessels in the gulf are fur- nished with seines?—A. Perhaps one-third. Q. I believe you have a claim against the American Government for a refund of duties 3–A. Yes. Q. It remains there yet 2—A. Yes. \ Q. What is its amount º–A. $30,700. Q. You told Mr. Foster that if a duty was reimposed you would con- sider very seriously whether you would continue in the business %–A. Yes. Q. You made that statement on the assumption that you paid the duty ?—A. Yes. t - Q. I think it has been explained very clearly that the price of fish depends almost altogether on the catch; this is the case to a large ex- tent º–A. To a large extent; yes. If there is a large catch of mackerel prices rule low, and if there is a small catch they rule high. Q. If the evidence given here on the part of British witnesses is correct, two-thirds of the fish taken by American vessels in the gulf, I may say, are Gaught inshore; and, assuming that two-thirds of their whole catch in the gulf is taken inside of the three-mile limit, could the American fleet, if they were excluded from fishing within this limit, prosecute the gulf fishery for the other third ; would this pay them ?—A. I think it would be a difficult business to do so, if that proportion is €Orrect. - Q. Have you any difficulty at all in answering this question ; could AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2867 they come to the bay to fish for one-third of their usual catch 7–A. I should not think that they could thus do a successful business; it would be unsuccessful under such circumstances. - Q. You think it would not pay them then to come 2—A. Not if they caught two-thirds of their fish inside of and were excluded from the three-mile limit. Q. Supposing that they catch that quantity within the limits, what would be the effect if they were excluded from this limit, and if, in con- sequence, two-thirds of the quantity which they caught were withdrawn from the market 2—A. That would depend upon the catch on the Amer- ican shore. Q. You gave one year, 1871, when a great catch was made on the American shore ?—A. Yes. Q. Suppose that the catch on the American shore was not large, and that they were excluded from fishing within the limits in the gulf, where, we will assume, they get two-thirds of their fish, what would be the effect 3—A. If there was a large catch here they would feel it very much. • Q. Who?—A. They would. Q. Would the price then go up?—A. If there was a large catch here, and no catch there, this would be the case. i Q. Would the price go up under the circumstances I have mentioned, if the catch on the American shore was not a large one. What would be the effect of this on the fish caught by the island fishermen and forwarded to the States ?—A. That would most likely enhance the price. Q. So the question as to who pays the duty depends almost altogether on the catch, and whether the Americans are allowed to fish within the limits in the gulf?—A. Yes; the fact is that they take three-quarters of the catch, that is the trouble. Some years they have a large catch, and Some years this is not the case. Q. Take the average : you mean to say that, taking what the Ameri- Cans catch in their vessels here and on their own coast, they take three- Quarters of the catch 7–A. I mean to say that the inspection in the States shows that three-quarters of the fish are taken by American, Vessels. Q. But you cannot state what proportion of this catch is taken in the Gulf of St. Lawrence %–A. No ; no further than I hear, that this catch has been very small during the last three years. Q. But how is it on the whole—no duty has been levied during the last three years 7–A. That does not make their catch any less. Of Course, if there was good fishing in the gulf, and they had free access. to the inshore fisheries, they would be more willing to come to the gulf, that if licenses were required, or if they were excluded from these inshore fisheries. Q. A number of American witnesses have told me that they desire duties put on our fish, because this would give them an enhanced price for their fish ; do you agree with that view 2–A. No. - Q. You think that all who state that opinion are in error?—A. I thin they are mistaken. 4. Q. You differ in opinion on this point from every one of them ?—A. I do. I think they are mistaken in supposing that the putting on of a duty would give them more a barrel for their fish. Taking it altogether, I think that this would not be the case. Q. If you are correct in thinking that a duty would exclude our fish, 2868 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION.. must it not necessarily enchance the price of their fish 7–A. Not neces. Sarily. - Q. What—if the supply is limited one-quarter, would not this have that effect”—A. If one-quarter of the supply was cut off, it would have some effect; but if there was a good catch on the American shore, this would not enhance the price $2 a barrel. Q. If the one-quarter thus lacking was made up, and the demand supplied, that would not be the case; but if one-quarter of the average supply was taken out of the market, do you not believe that this would necessarily enhance the price?—A. It might have some effect upon it, but it would not enhance the price $2 a barrel. Q. You think not ?—A. No. Q. Between what prices do mackerel vary in the market?—A. From $5 to $30 per barrel for the different qualities. - - Q. What are the causes of these variations?—A. Partly the quality and partly the catch. - Q. The consumption remains on the average about the same 2—A. No ; it does not. It is not now what it was 5 or 10 years ago. Q. Has it been about the same during the last 5 years?—A. It Varies according to the price. ..Q. What is the cause of the variation in prices?—A. The catch, in great measure. Q. Suppose that one-quarter of the catch was withdrawn, would the price then go up 2–A. This would depend upon the catch and Quality. ' - Q. If the catch fell off one-quarter, would not the price inevitably go up 7–A. It would have that effect, of course. Q. Suppose that one-quarter of the catch on the American shore fell off, compared with the average, would not the price then go up 7–A. It always goes up then. Q. If the price goes up, who pays the enhanced price; is it not the consumer ?—A. Yes. .* - Q. And if the catch is large the price goes down; so it would depend in some measure on whether the catch on the American or on our Own shore was large, as to who would pay this duty 3–A. Yes; and on the Quality of the mackerel. - Q. All these elements would have to be considered ?–A. Some, yes; there is no other market than the United States for mackerel, and of course we have no other market for these fish. Q. I think you left the impression on some minds, at least, that the imposition of the duty caused your disasters?—A. Yes. - Q. Was there not another cause for them, which accounted in large measure for the failure of your catch that year—the effect consequent on your vessels being seized ?–A. They were seized in 1870. Q. Had not that a great deal to do with your difficulties?—A. Of course. I lost money by these seizures, and, my business being broken up, I was not able to trade in Charlottetown. Q. Did not that materially contribute to your difficulties?—A. We would not have failed on that account. We were worth a large amount of property, and we could have stood a great many losses like that. - - Q. But this was one of the causes that contributed, and contributed largely to it?—A. A small percentage of it was due to that. Q. Do you know whether purse-seining has been looked on by fisher- men generally as a failure or not ?—A. I think that it is not looked . AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2869 upon as a failure altogether. Different opinions are entertained in this regard. - Q. Some think it is a failure and some think it is not ?—A. I think that going into this seining is generally looked upon as a mistake. Q. Why?—A. It is looked upon as an instrument that may be dis- astrous to the fishing in the future. A great many fish are lost in this mode of Seining. A great many fish are thus caught which cannot be taken out, and they are hence altogether lost. I do not think that this has occurred here, but it has occurred on the American coast. Q. What do you say your shipments of mackerel will be this year— 7,000 or 8,000 barrels?—A. Yes. -- Q. What do you think the island shipments will amount to this year 7—A. They will approximate between 20,000 and 25,000 barrels. By Mr. Foster : Q. You do not mean that this quantity has gone forward 3–A. I mean the whole shipments. This is, however, a mere estimate. Q. Mr. Davies has made the hypothesis that the United States vessels take two-thirds of their catch in the gulf within the limits, and he asked you what effect, under these circumstances, would their exclusion from these be, if they had a small catch on their own coast, and you say that this would tend to enhance the price, and of course it would. I would now like to know whether, on that hypothesis, prices would go up indefi- nitely, or whether there is a point where people would stop buying mackerel ?—A. Mackerel will not be consumed in large quantities at high prices. - Q. What is the price at which they will stop buying, the quantity taken of mess mackerel, purchased as a luxury, excepted ?—A. Large Quantities of mackerel cannot be sold at prices over $8 for number threes, at about $10 and $11 for number twos, and about $12 or $14 for number ones. - Q. Do vessels which come to the gulf with seines, also bring hooks and lines?—A. Yes; they do. * Q. Do you mean to say that no merchant can depend on mackerel Continuing in demand at high prices º–A. No, he cannot. The business then falls off. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. We have heard of a vessel called the Lettie, which fished on the American coast, of which, I believe, you are proprietor 7—A. Yes. Q. Can you tell me where she fished on the American coast, and Whether she was successful ?–A. She fished there one year for pogies, and was very successful. She got all she could bring. Q. Did she fish close to the shore or off shore ?—A. I think that she fished pretty near the shore sometimes. - Q. That is the only Canadian vessel which you know of as having fished there?—A. I am not acquainted with any other that has done so. By Mr. Davies: Q. How much do you pay the fishermen per barrel on shore for their mackerel ?—A. I have paid them $1.50 per 100 fish. Q. What is that per barrel ?—A. $3.75. Q. How much salt do you use for a barrel of mackerel ?—A. It will take about 5 pecks to use a barrel and pack it. Q. What does the salt cost you ?–A. 25 cents a bushel. Q. When you speak of paying them $3.75 a barrel, you mean all round—for ones, twos, and threes 2—A. That would be for the average. 287() AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What does the salt cost you ?–A. About 31 cents per barrel. -- Q. And what do the barrels cost 3–A. On the average, perhaps 90 CentS. * Q. What is the expense of pickling and packing, leaving out the cost of the barrel and salt”—A. It would be very hard to tell that. Q. They put the price of packing altogether in Gloucester at $2, and they say that from 25 to 50 cents profit is made on that ?—A. In order to cure our fish, we have to put a large gang of men, perhaps from 12 to 15, on shore, to handle the fish, and we have to pay them wages. Q. Would 30 cents per barrel suffice, besides the cost of the barrels and salt, to cure a barrel of mackerel ?—A. No ; that would not begin to do it. That would probably take not less than $2 a barrel. Q. In Gloucester they say they charge $2 for packing 2—A. That is merely for packing—a different thing entirely. Q. That includes the barrel and salt 3–A. I understand that ; but that is a different thing entirely. These fish, which are packed in Glou- cester, are already cured; they are merely packed, while our fish come in fresh, and we have to split, gut, and rim them, soak and salt them in hogsheads, and afterward, after they have lain long enough in the salt, We have to pack them up. Q. What would you think that you pack them for 2—A. I cannot give you an exact idea on that head; but I would say that the whole expense would not be less than $3 a barrel. - Q. Including barrel and salt 3–A. That includes everything. Q. And what is the cost of freight to Boston 3–A. About 85 cents, or about 80 cents, actual freight. The cost of curing depends so much on the catch, that you cannot form an idea with regard to the actual cost. It costs as much to cure 700 barrels as 1,700, or there is very little difference in this respect. The cost is about the same in either case, aside from the barrel and salt. If you have a gang of men to cure fish, they are there, and you have to pay them wages; you must feed them, and when there is a small catch you have the same expense on your hands as when there is a large catch. One year you may be successful, and the cost will be small ; and another year you may not be successful, and the cost will then be very high ; and so no estimate can be made in this regard that would be correct. By Mr. Foster: Q. Your vessels were not seized for fishing inshore, but for some trouble about registration ?—A. They were seized on the ground that I was a foreigner, who had a beneficial interest in vessels flying the Eng- lish flag. Q. At what figure did you put the price for a bushel of salt 3—A. About 25 cents. Q. And how many bushels are there to a barrel ?—A. 34, I should think, and 13 bushels would cure a barrel, pickle and all. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg: Q. With regard to this conflict of testimony, which is very great, as to the proportion of mackerel that, is taken by American vessels inside of the three-mile limit—running, as you know, with witnesses from P. JE. Island, to the extent of two-thirds or three-quarters of their catch— do you know whether that has always been the opinion of gentlemen familiar with the fishing there on the island and the localities where this fishing is prosecuted ?–A. I never supposed that it was. I do not think that this has been the case, but I cannot tell you what has been the opinion in this relation farther than stating my own impression re- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2871 specting it. I gave my impression from what I could hear from these men and learn from my own observation, as you see, three or four years ago; and I gave it in good faith ; but whether right or wrong, of course that was merely the impression which I received. The testimony given here by gentlemen of integrity and character from the States is very different from that ; and the testimony of men from the island, and the masters of my vessels, is right the reverse. I do not think that my opinion on this subject is worth anything under the circumstances. No. 72. Mond AY, October 22, 1877. The Conference met. WALTER M. FALT, of Gloucester, Mass., fish merchant, called on behalf of the Government of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Trescot: Question. Where do you live 3–Answer. At Gloucester. Q. How old are you ?—A. Fifty-four. I am in my 55th year. Q. What is your business?—A. I carry on a fishing business. Q. What do you mean by that ? Are you a fish merchant, or are you engaged actively in the fishing 2—A. We have a firm, and send out Vessels. --- - Af Q. You have a firm, and are engaged in sending out fishing vessels of your own 3–A. Yes. * Q. Have you been a practical fisherman at any time?—A. I was eleven and a half years a master, and other years as a hand. Q. What fishing did you prosecute 3–A. Principally cod-fishing and halibut. George's fishing in the spring, and halibut fishing for the remainder of the year. Q. You haven’t been doing anything very much in mackerel ?—A. I never tried that since I was a master, but a month at a time was the longest at any time, and hardly that. Q. How many vessels have you ?–A. 18 now that we handle. Q. They are engaged in what sort of fishing 2—A. Mackerel, fresh halibut, George's, salt fishing. - - Q. What proportion of your vessels are engaged in the mackerel fish ing 2—A. We send ten in the business. - Q. Where do they go generally ?—A. In the spring, generally south, down off New York, and to the southward, then they follow this way ; that is, on our western shore. - Q. Do these ten vessels go into the gulf?—A. We had five there this year. z Q. Have you been sending very long to the bay ?—A. Well, this is the first year we have had so many for the last three years. We dwindled down until we had only one ; that was last year. Q. Have you any knowledge, or are you able to form any opinion where your bay fishers go 3–A. Well, they generally go northward to the Banks Bradley and Orphan, up that way and across to the Mag- dalens. Q. Have you been able to form any knowledge, from what you know, what proportion of the catches are made within the three-mile limit in the bay ?—A. In all my practice, and what I understand from my vessels, they practice outside of three miles on Bradley and Orphan, and at the Magdalens. Q. Well, in the course of your experience, with your vessels going to the coast and to the bay, have you been able to form any comparison 2872 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. in your own mind as to the relative value of the two fisheries?—A. We found, since I have been in the business, that our business has been more profitable on our own coast. Q. Do you know what has been done, on the average, in the bay ? I mean per vessel ?—A. Well, I guess you have the account here for my firm. Q. You are a partner of Leighton 7–A. Yes. Q. Well, now, with regard to the halibut fishery, how many vessels have been employed, and what has been your knowledge of it yourself? How long have you been at it 2–A. I followed that, I say, eleven and a half years, from the first of April to the last of November; that is what I practiced myself when I followed the water, to the middle of November or so. - Q. And where have you caught your halibut?—A. On what we call the Seal Island ground, Brown's and Lahave, and in the Bay of Fundy, as far as Grand Manan, Marblehead Bank, and so on. - Q. In your experience, what sort of fishing is it, off shore or within 3– A. Well, you can’t get any halibut within three miles, nor on the three miles. - Q. Will you point out what course you ran when you were halibut- fishing, and how near it brought you to Cape Sable Island 3–A. (Refers to map and points out fishing-grounds.) . - Q. You know the waters from Seal Island toward Cape Sable and Cape Sable Island 3–A. Yes. - Q. Have you ever known in your experience in that fishing, of any fishing for halibut within three miles?—A. No. It can’t be got. Q. Let me call your attention to the testimony of a gentleman by the name of William B. Smith, residing at Cape Sable Island. It is as fol- lows (Reads evidence of William B. Smith, page 439 of the British evidence, from the question: “With regard to halibut-fishing. Is there any halibut-fishing carried on near Cape Sable Island?” To the ques- tion: “Do they take the halibut they catch to market salted or fresh 2" and the answer, inclusive): Now, with your knowledge—you say you have yourself fished for eleven and a half years—do you think there is any possibility of that being true? Mr. THOMSON. Is that a general answer to the whole question ? Mr. TRESCOT. Well, I will ask them severally. Q. “With regard to halibut-fishing, is there any halibut-fishing car- ried on near Cape Sable Island 7–A. Not by British people; the Amer- icans fish there.”—A. That is not the case. Q. “Every year 7—A. Every year, regularly”—A. They are not to be found there in any such depth of water; not so near. Q. “What is the number of the fleet which comes there to fish for halibut?—A. I have seen as high as nine sail at one time. I should Suppose there was from 40 to 60 sail.”—A. There never was that many in the business in the world. Q. You have some knowledge of the matter 7—A. I have. I know every root and branch of it; and when it was at the most it was in those years that I was going. That was the most that ever was done on those grounds. # Q. How many halibut vessels from Gloucester are there do you sup- pose 3—A. We ran at the most of any time 31 sail. These don’t resort to these grounds whatever. They resort to Grand Bank, Western Bank, Quero, and all such as that. Q. What proportion of that fleet would be fishing about Seal Island, \ AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2873 / within the neighborhood of Cape Sable %–A. None at all. No one practiced that business singe I left it. Q. “Are the vessels cod-fishers at other times of the year 3–A.. I think they are. During the latter, part of May and June they fish for halibut; then they fish for cod until October, and then for halibut.” What do you say to that ? Do you know of any of the American fleet fishing for halibut in May and June 3—A. No. Q. And then for cod until October, and then for halibut 7–A. No. Q. Now you can answer the question whether a man can See a fleet catching them from his door.—A. That man never saw them. Q. I notice, in another portion of this same gentleman's testimony, he was asked this question: “You used to catch halibut in weirs?” and answered, “Yes, in our traps.” You don’t know of halibut being caught in weirs as a practice?—A. Well, he might be just as likely; just as a whale would go into a harbor, or a black fish, once in a hundred years. By Mr. Thomson : Q. Did you go into the Bay St. Lawrence when you went aboard your- Self?—A. When I was master ? No. - - Q. You never were there at all ?—A. I was there as a hand. Q. What years?—A. 1851, 1853, 1854, and 1855. Q. In 1851, where did you fish 7–A. We went up to the northward, on to the Banks, and across to the Magdalens. - Q. You never fished within three miles?—A. We didn’t practice that, because the cutters were around. - Q. Was that the reason you didn’t fish within Ż—A. And also, our master that I was with, it was the first he was there, and he was more Cautious probably. Q. Was that the reason you did not fish inshore ?—A. Yes. Q. What was your catch 7–A. We brought home 240 barrels. Q. What was your tonnage?–A. Fifty-five tons; it was what they Call a pinkey. Q. What was her full cargo 2–A. That was all she brought. Q. What time did you go into the gulf?—A. The latter end of July. Q. And what time did you come out 3–A. We came out somewhere along the last of October. Q. During all that time you never fished within three miles?—A. We fished when we came down from the northward, after the big gale. We went across to Margaree, and fished to make up somewhere about 20 barrels. Q. What time did you go to Margaree?—A. After the big gale, ten days. Q. What time was the gale'?—A. In October. Q. You were ten days in at Margaree?—A. I say we were at Souris a Week, and then came across between the island and what We call Margaree, fishing across that way. - Q. Where were you during the big gale 7–A. Up to the island. Q. What part of the island 7–A. We came out of Gaspé that morn- ing the gale come on. - Q. It was a northeast gale %–A. Yes. Q. You were north of the island, on that coast, when you came down from Gaspé 3—A. I say we came out of Malpeque. Q. You said Gaspé 7–A. I did not mean Gaspé ; I mean Malpeque. We came out of that on a Friday morning, and Friday night the gale came on. It was moderate, and the wind hauled to the eastward, so we fººd we would go back, but it shut down so thick that we had to allll OTI, 2874. - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Were you out in the bay all the time 2—A. Yes. Q. With Prince Edward Island forming a lee coast 3–A. Yes. Q. You rode out the gale %–A. We were under sail—the same as if it were to-night; in the morning we wore and laid her head to the southward and eastward until half past twelve o'clock, and then parted at half past five that night, and continued to make our way down the island. - - Q. What time was the storm over ?—A. Not until Saturday night. Q. And notwithstanding this great storm, you came down along the windward of Prince Edward Island without being wrecked ?–A. Yes, SII’. - - Q. Then you went over to Margaree?—A. Then we went to Souris and repaired our damages, and came out and went across towards Mar- garee and finished up the balance. Q. There you went within three miles?—A. We caught some fish. Q. You did go in 3–A. We had the heft of our fish before we went in. Q. You did go in and fish, didn’t you ?—A. Well, I suppose if we anchored under the island we were in. - - Q. What objection have you to mention the fact º–A. I acknowledge We went inside. Q. You took fish in there?—A. Yes. Q. How many ?–A. I can’t tell exactly. It might tote up 15 or it might be 20. Q. It might be 25 or 30?–A. I didn’t say that. Q. But can you say it and tell the truth? If you did say 30 would it be true?—A. No. I guess we didn’t get that many there. Q. How many do you say you did get 2—A. From 15 to 20. - Q. Do you swear you didn’t get more than 20?–A. I would not Swear, because I could not bring that to my recollection perfectly. Q. Those you took close inshore?—A. Well, yes, the same as the rest of our vessels did. ; Q. Were there many besides your own in 3–A. I could not call that - º recollection. There might be one or two or there might be half 3. ClOZēIl. Q. Were there or not?—A. I could not say. Q. Did you see any ?–A.. I say I could not bring it to my recollec- tion. I know there was some there. - Q. Did you see any ?—A. Yes. - Q. Did you see them also fishing within the limits 2—A. I could not call that to my recollection, who they were. There was English and American vessels there. Q. Will you undertake to swear, or will you undertake to deny, that there was a number of American vessels fishing around you at the same time, and fishing within three miles?—A. I could not say that. Q. You will not swear there was any 2 Have you any doubt what- ever that a number of American vessels were fishing around you within three miles; that they were there, and that you saw them 2–A. They are just as likely to be in the same position as myself, three, or four, or five miles. Q. Do you say your vessel was three, or four, or five miles?—A. She was to and fro, yes. - Q. You admit you took those 20 barrels”—A. I say from 15 to 20. Q. You took those within three miles 7–A. I won't say we did, all of them. . Q. You said you took 15 or 20 barrels within three miles. Now, you Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2875 mean to say you did not ?—A. You asked me if I was there at Mar. garee. Q. I asked you how many you took within the three-mile limit, and you said from 15 to 20. Now you say you didn’t do anything of the kind 2–A. I don’t say I didn’t. Q. Didn’t you tell me just now you took those within three miles?— A.. I might have answered that. - Q. Did you tell the truth when you did say so * - Mr. TRESCOT. I wish to enter my respectful protest against the style Of cross-examination. * | Mr. THOMSON. I enter my counter-protest against the witness evad- ing plain questions. Q. Didn’t you tell me just now, within the last ten minutes, that you caught from 15 to 20 barrels within the three-mile limit off Margaree?— A. I stated that we caught from 15 to 20 barrels while we were there. We might have been, I have said, inside of three miles. Q. Have you any doubt about it 3–A. I have no doubt we were in- side the limits. Q. When you took the 15 or 20 barrels?—A. We might not have taken them all. Q. How many do you swear you took inside the limits 3–A.. I could not say whether we were all the time inside the three miles. Q. I don’t care whether you were all the time or half the time; but 'how many barrels will you swear you took within the limits 7—A. I Can’t say. Q. Will you swear to five?—A. Yes. Q. Will you swear to ten ?—A. No. Q. Then you swear positively it was between five and ten, and noth- ing over ?—A. I would not swear positively over that. Q. How many did you get 2—A. I will swear to five barrels. Q. Five is as high as you will go, after telling me you caught 20 bar- rels within three miles?—A. No ; I said around that place. Q. Will you swear you caught one single barrel outside the limits around Margaree?—A. I could not say that we were at the time three miles off all the time or three miles in. Q. Then your evidence is this, if I understand you : You swear posi- tively that you took five barrels within the limits; and you won’t swear that you took one single barrel outside the limits. That is the extraor- dinary testimony you give now. I ask you, will you swear that you took a single barrel outside, and you say you will not ?—A. I say I can SW 83, I’. - Q. Didn't you tell me—I asked you if you would swear that you caught a single barrel outside, and you said you could not?—A. I didn’t understand you. - Q. What was your answer?—A. I said yes, sir. Q. Didn’t you answer that you could not undertake to say ?–A. I didn’t mean it if I did ; not by any means. Q. Now, your next trip was when 7–A. 1853. Q. Where did you fish then ?—A. On the same grounds. Q. Were you master then 3–A. No ; I was a hand. All my time in the bay I was a hand. - Q. Did you fish then within the three-mile limit 2–A. We fished in the fall on the same grounds, at Margaree and Cheticamp. Q. Do you mean to say those were the only places you fished within the limits—that is, Cheticamp and Margaree?—A. We fished up the island, on Bradley and Orphan and at the Magdalens. 2876 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Do you call that fishing within the limits 7–A. No. -- Q. Then I come back to your fishing on Margaree and Cheticamp. Do I understand you only fished within the limits at Margaree and Cheticamp 7–A. Yes. Q. How many did you take?—A. Probably about 40 barrels. Q. Now you understand my question, how many barrels did you take at Margaree and Cheticamp within the limit5% Your answer is 40 bar- rels. Is that right” Did you take off Margaree and Cheticamp, out- side the limits, any fish 3–A. When we worked across from the Mag- dalens we fished across outside the limits. Q. You just took 40 barrels within the limits 2—A. To the best of my knowledge. Q. Those you certainly did take within the limits” On that occasion were there a number of American vessels fishing around you?—A. I could not tell you the number, whether there were more or less. Q. I want to know whether there was a number of American vessels around you. There were vessels?—A. Yes. - Q. Can you give me any idea how many ?—A. I cannot. Q. Over ten?—A. I could not say. Q. Could you say there were not twenty 2–A. Yes. . Q. Will you swear there were five 3–A. I should think there was five the time we were fishing. Q. They were also fishing, were they?—A. Yes. - Q. Now what was the tonnage of your schooner on that occasion ?— A. About 90 tons, carpenters' measurement. Q. She carried a cargo of 400 barrels?—A. No, 275. Q. Was that a full cargo 3–A. No, she carried about 300 barrels. Q. Now during all that time you did not fish anywhere around the gºt of New Brunswick, Bay Chaleurs, or Prince Edward Island 7–A. O. Q. Why didn't you fish within three miles 3–A. All our fishing was on the Cape Breton side. º Q. Why didn't you fish along the Prince Edward Island shore ?—A. Because we were not on that coast. - - Q. You were on the coast if you were on the Orphan Bank. That is a very little distance from the coast; why didn’t you fish inshore there?— A. We didn’t resort there. - Q. Why 2 Were you afraid of cutters ?—A. Yes: the large one was there, and the small one, too, and the sailing-schooners. Q: What time did you leave the bay that year 3–A. In the latter part of October. - Q. And you didn’t get a full cargo 3–A. No. - Q. Do you know anything about the inshore fisheries, of your own knowledge, at all, except at Margaree and Chetticamp 7–A. No. . You never have fished inshore except there 3—A. That is all. . Never at any time 2—A. No. . What time did you go next into the bay ?—A. 1854. . After the Reciprocity Treaty 3–A. Yes. . Then you had the liberty of fishing inshore ?—A. Yes. - . Do you swear that you never tried inshore, although you had the liberty 7–A. We had the liberty then of going in to get water. Q. And to fish too?—A. We took the opportunity, as we came out of the harbor, or anything like that, to try as we went off. Q. Didn’t you know you had as good a right as the British fisher- men 3—A. Yes. Q. Didn't you try?—A, Yes. ; AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2877 Q. You say you only tried when you were driven in ?—A, I say when We Came Out of the harbor. Q. This was the common practice, whether you had the right or not? A. Yes; that is our practice on our own coast. Q. Didn’t you ever go in and try what the inshore fisheries were like When you had the privilege ; there was no cutter then?—A. All my first two years there was. Q. I am speaking now of 1854. You said you did not go in there; and I want to know why 3–A. Wherever we could find them most we tried. Q. Did you or did you not fish inshore ?—A. Yes. Q. Along the whole coast of Prince Edward Island 7–A. Wherever we could find fish, the same as off East Point, off Malpeque, and such like as that. º Q. Did you fish within three miles 7–A. You can get a few. Q. Why did you tell me that at the time you were in the gulf you never fished within the limits except at Cheticamp and Margaree, when it now turns out—A. I mean that time I was there in those sea- SOI. S. * Q. What seasons 3–A. 1851 to 1853. Q. I did not ask you that. I asked you generally. You told me you never fished inside except at Margaree and Cheticamp. There is no mistake about that ?—A. That is all correct, but I didn't intend any- thing more than that year. - Q. Very well, then, I will take 1855. Did you get a full cargo in 1854 %—A. No. Q. What was the vessel's size 7–A. The same size—90 tons. Q. How many did you get that year 7—A. 275. Q. Was that a full cargo 7–A. She would probably carry 350 barrels, Small packages and all. Q. Then you hadn’t a full cargo 7–A. No ; no year I was there. Q. Didn't you fish along off Cascumpec at all 7–A. No ; we never found any. Q. Didn’t you fish at the Magdalen Islands at all ?—A. We were aCrOSS there. Q. Did you catch many there ?—A. Some. Q. Now, take 1855; where did you fish then 3–A. On the same grounds. Q. What do you call the same grounds º Do you mean that you fished along inshore that year?—A. It was inshore at Magaree and Cheticamp. Q. Anywhere else inshore ?—A. No. Q. Did you get a full cargo 7–A. No. { Q. Then, although you did not get a full cargo, you never tried the fishing inshore ?—A. No. *. Q. Why did you keep away ?—A. Wherever we found most fish we resorted. º - Q. Now, didn’t you get your full cargo 7–A. No. * Q. Then why didn't you try inshore ?—A. We tried inshore when we were winding up in the fall. r Q. Where?—A. We tried inshore at Margaree and Cheticamp. Q. Why didn't you try inshore at the island 7–A. Because nobody else caught any. Q. You discovered that others had tried and failed ?–A. Yes. Q. Who did you inquire of ?–A. We came with the fleet. - Q. Did you inquire of the vessels that did fish in there, and find 2878 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION, that they didn't catch any ?—A. Yes. If they had, we would have tried too. - - Q. I ask you, did you ever inquire of other vessels that had fished in there and got nothing 3–A. We never practiced inside three miles or two miles of the shore. Q. Now, don’t you know that is an evasion of my question. I asked you if you ever inquired of any captains whether they had fished in- ‘side and whether they had got any inside, and you say you never prac- ticed inside. I will put my question again. Did you, on that occasion, in 1855, meet any single American vessel that had fished inside of three miles along the coast of Prince Edward Island, and learn from her that there was no inside fishing 3–A. I didn’t particularly Q. Then, although - Mr. TRESCOT. Let him answer. Q. Do you want to say anything else?—A. When we are around among our vessels, we speak and say this: “Did you find any fish, such and so *" And they say “No.” Of course we don’t go there. Q. Well, I presume you don’t say “such and so.” You give the name of the place 3–A. Yes. Q. Now, I ask whether you put the question whether they had fished at any place around the coast of Prince Edward Island 7–A. No. Q. Then, without finding from a single captain that he had fished in- side on that coast and caught no mackerel, you came away with part of a cargo, and didn’t try inside, although you had full liberty ?—A. When we came away, we were on the Cape Breton Island side. Q. From where?—A. We were at Chetticamp and Margaree. It was in the end of the season, and the mackerel gave out, and we came home. Q. Now you have given the lie to William B. Smith. Do you know him 3–A. No. A Q. According to you there is no fishing along Seal Island at all?—A. Not so close in. Q. Have you been there?—A. I have passed to and fro. | Q. Have you ever fished there?—A. No. Q. Then, as to a ground on which you never fished, you are pleased to Swear that a man has committed perjury Mr. TRESCOT objects. Q. You are pleased to swear that he has said what was not true when he said he caught fish there. You swear that his statement is utterly untrue, although you never tried it yourself. You don’t speak merely of Opinions, but you have sworn to it as a fact— Mr. TRESCOT. The witness referred to (William B. Smith) does not say that he caught fish there, but that he saw them caught. By Mr. Thomson: t Q. Now, why, if you have never tried that ground, do you undertake to say that halibut could not be caught there?—A. Because it is not, in that depth of water. * Q. What is the depth of water within three miles or two miles of the coast there?—A. I guess you can’t find anything more than Seven to nine fathoms there. ** '. A. & You will swear to that ? Do you know that from experience?— . Y. B.S. - Q. Have you sounded ?–A. Yes. Q. You have sounded there and found it to be only seven fathoms?— A. I say nine. - Q. Now I hold in my hand Admiral Bayfield's map with soundings— Mr. TRESCOT. What chart is that ? - Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2879 Mr. THOMSON. This is a survey by Andrew P. F. Shortland, assisted by Lieutenant Scott and others. It is one of the admiralty charts. Mr. TRESCOT. What is the date % Mr. THOMSON. It is 1855. Mr. FOSTER. We have one corrected from the latest surveys, in 1876. Mr. THOMSON. The soundings will not have changed since then. Mr. FOSTER. They may have been more correctly taken, though. By Mr. Thomson : Q. Here is Green Island, where that man said he lived; here are, within two miles of the land, soundings running up to 14, 17, and 18 fathoms; and here, within half a mile, is a depth of 10 fathoms. All these are in the very place where the witness said he saw the vessels fishing. He gives the bearings about southwest by west. Now, you have sworn that it was impossible for this man to see these vessels, which he swore were one and a half miles and two miles away from him. You don’t undertake to say, now that I have shown you the distance from Green Island—you don’t undertake to say that from that distance he would fail to see them if they were fishing there 3—A. I say this, there was never that many to be seen. Q. Although you were not there, you undertake to say “that man never saw them ’7—A. I have been around the ground. I have been about the place enough to know whether there was that many there. Q. Now, have you followed the business?—A. I followed it from the 1st April to the middle of November. - Q. And you have taken soundings. I thought you told me just now you didn’t fish there?—A. I know there was not that many fishermen ever in the business. I am perfectly satisfied of it. Q. How long since you were there last 3–A. Seven years ago this Se2SOIl. Q. Of course, you are aware that Smith was speaking of the last year or two, while you hadn't been there for eleven years?—A. Why I Spoke— Q. I don’t want to know your reasons; I ask simply whether you know that Smith was speaking of what happened a year or two ago, while you admit you never were there for the last-eleven years 7–A. I know I was not there. Q. And you knew Smith was speaking of what took place a year Or two ago?—A. I know there is not that many in the business. I sup- posed he was speaking of what was transacted in the fishing business. Q. Did you suppose he was speaking of what was within a year or two ago?—A. No ; I understood that he had been speaking of what happened to and fro for years. By Mr. Trescot : Q. Just explain that. You are asked whether, you understood that Smith was speaking of what he had seen in 1874 and 1875, and whether you denied that he saw those vessels there then, or whether you sup- posed he was referring to the fishing generally 3–A. That is what I referred to. I supposed he referred to what had been transacted in, business for years to and fro. > * > * , ” . . e. e. * * e 2. tº # gº No. 73. • * CHARLES H. PEW, of Gloucester, Mass., called on behalf of the Gov- ernment of the United States, sworn and examined. By Mr. Foster: Question. You Were born in Gloucester ?—Answer. Yes. 2880 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. How old are you?—A. 42 years old. • * . Q. You a member of the firm of John Pew & Sons, founded by your father—when 3–A. In 1849. & Q. I believe it is the largest firm in Gloucester 7–A. I guess it is the largest in the States. s Q. What is your business?—A. Owners and fitters of vessels, and dealers in fish and salt. & a Q. How many vessels have you owned or controlled within the last fifteen or twenty years 7–A. About 20; we have averaged about 20. Q. By the way, your father started the firm in 1849; when did you go into it 3–A. I went into it when I was 16 years old as a clerk. Then as a partner when I was 20. He shortened my time. Q. Did you have a brother also in it 7–A. Yes. - Q. He retired from it in 1861, I am informed ?–A. Yes. Then my younger brother came in two or three years after that. He is in it now. Q. I thought you had a brother that retired about the end of the war 7 —A. That is my elder brother. - - Q. Who compose, the firm now 2-A. My father, myself, and my younger brother. William A. Pew retired at the beginning of the war. My father, previous to the establishment of the business, went fishing himself as a little boy. . Q. Now, what is the principal business of the firm ? What branch 7– A. Well, all are about equally important. We are largely engaged in dealing in codfish. Probably codfish is the larger part of the business. We deal largely in mackerel and herring, and also in salt. Q. Can you give us a statement of your mackerel business in the bay and on the coast of the United States for the past few years ?—A. I Can. It is as follows: AWARD" OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2881 98I03'&g0‘I• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •-----------------··---··---···---··---···---··---···---------------------------- peļoſ, 0I£18.30!• ſ） → • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •··---····---··---·····---··---···---···---····---···---··---··---···---------------------------------- » qsgpoo †g888Iſő:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::--:---··---····---···---·····---····---··---····---··-------- fotoſoewi arous 33g66 ‘LLË---------······---····---···---··---·····---·····--------------------------------------------------------------------------------ſanggoanKeſſ : 9A0q'8 se ‘SI 89Á A TI! uoſąompo Id qsg go ºm[e A. ĻeņoȚ, "pºļ8ūIȚļ8ÇI, OL 818'30" | 881 '981 || 898'168'il ºg 888 T-3 || 9&Lºg | ±±0，01 || 8II '8_| 88 966'） || 118 | ell'8|| 318 ºg 388 ºg | Lg6 9 |··---···---·········---·····---····sreak 1. Joſ reſo I. 33 908 ‘ýřI | 000 '08， |000'000'll 00 g66'08 || 00g,838 '&x | 00g;88 g89 ‘I 60 993 ºg8 68 8Ğſ ‘99$ }» 893 | LeL , ggg ºg | 191 |---------------------------------------------------- gigt OI 166 80ſ | ¡ ¿O3 | ºſſºgºg | 88 679，03 || 83; 'I | LIŤIŤg9† 6; | 366 | 383 | 088 ºg | 939 || ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-------------------------------------------- gigt ſ.ſ. ſgï £II || #8033 | 031. ‘99 || 96 g03%9 - || 688 ‘I | #08 'I | 6，8 % || ģg gę5$ | ī6T | Ôž# |.ğšč | žțğ ºğ |ğõõ‘I |---------------------------------------------------- Ķīği && LL), ‘¡II || 6gſ, '&g || ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~8I g96 ºgg | gg9815 'L | gºl. ‘I | 99 861 ‘6I , ggl | gſg | #98 || 318 ºg | #ğğ ‘i |---------------------------------------------------- ķīği §. ‘9I || ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | IO II6 ‘Lºg | #99ģ‘I || gſſ || || ģ Ķ ķ Ļ | 68 | 9țI „Į gęſ | Iſº ſº | 039 || |:::::::::::--: -------------------------------------- gigt 16 656 69 | 88/, '$1 ||--~~~~ ~~~~| 13 Igº 'gg | gſg 89),gig‘I | 19 gſg gſ. | 198 | ggg'ı| 409 | «zgſg | ggg ºg !!！-------------------------------------------------- ūši 098 ‘OI |~~~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ || 61. ggg ‘08$ | gſ.800 ‘3 | ͦ II0'LI$ | Oſſ | †gg | ſg9 || 968 ºg | 136 |---------------------------------------------------- öīšį ș,E.§ 3ººmſe AŞ>©Ş>*9mĪBA$9Ş>§2 &+§3º3.* ±Þ3±+3 $9§ §§ GDe-+-§5,5Șº!9+）޺?9|-# №. ! |} — •º.©Ģ92. №gö, №8 go%o•32 ±5° E }-}}*[910x{0'euI 0JOUIS*[910x1080I KeſſÉ.˧Ē.‘J’80% & & | & & 9º es© }=+s}=+> '0? ‘qsŲp0O●-ºņsboo eJouſs u goțIQUūW Įo qųāneoq§!!!! Igſ. Į0 $.1948AA UȚ qųäng0*[0-I9X{08JWI \, ‘9048n10up '928I 04 028I nu04fºu0S ſº ºmºa uqop fiq ‘19,199|opų puo qºyſ’ fo woņonpowd po soņsņoņş 181 F 2882 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. These figures give what our vessels caught. They don’t give what we purchased outside of what the vessels caught. Q. When you speak of the catch of your vessels, have they been in the habit of buying mackerel here 7–A. No. - Q. But your firm has bought mackerel in Gloucester 2—A. Yes. . Q. Which has been the most profitable to your firm, the bay fishing or the fishing of the United States shores”—A. On the United States Shores. - 2. Q. Have you any statement of the result there carried out—the pro- ceeds 2—A. No. Q. Will you give me some illustration of the amount cleared by your vessels on our shores 7 You gave me one remarkable instance %–A. There was one schooner in 1874, I think it was. She cleared $8,000, which was divided among the owners. f : Q. After the crew was paid 3–A. After all expenses. Q. What did the sharesmen get that year 7—A. The sharesmen made, I think, over $900 each. - Q. It was done within what time 2—A. The latter part of June, July, August, and the early part of September. - Q. Where was that mackerel caught º–A. The large part of it was caught off Jeffrey’s Bank, just in sight of Gloucester, something like 12 or 14 miles off. - i Q. How many barrels of mackerel realized that amount º–A. I think somewhere about 1,400 or 1,500. - Q. What was the quality ?—A. Very fine. - Q. You gave me the amount of the last haul that vessel made in that year?—A. It was about 400 barrels in one haul of 10 days, I think. A few barrels short of 400. Q. This Was Seining %–A. This one vessel was. Q. Most of these catches on our shores have been made by seining?— A. For the last four or five years, from 1872, the largest part has been Selning. - i Q. How many vessels had you in the bay this year—1877 ?—A. We had 5 go seining, and 4 of them were at one time in the bay. Q. Did those which went into the bay go equipped with Seines and hooks and lines?—A. Yes. 4. * Q. Were they successful seining in the bay ?—A. Not as yet. ºve you ever known cases of successful seining in the bay 7– A. N.O. - Q. Can you give the catch of your own vessels in the gulf this summer ?—A. We have only had one home, I think, and she has packed somewhere about 200 barrels; and we have one on her way home, which has about 100 sea barrels, and will probably pack about 90 barrels. Q. Have you heard from the third vessel ?—A. We heard from the two others, and they were reported having somewhere about 70 or 80 barrels apiece. * * - Q. And they were both equipped with hooks and lines?—A. Yes. Q. Were their fish in the bay caught by seines or by hooks 7–A.. I should think that the larger part of them were taken with the hook. The statement for the trip is as follows. t - Q. How many vessels had you in the gulf in 1876?—A. One. Q. What did she do?—A. Nothing; she only took 167 barrels. Q. What was the profit and loss resulting from that voyage"—A. The loss on that trip was $369.96 to the owners of the vessel. The statement for this trip is as follows: -- AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. .2883 SCHOONER GENERAL GRANT. 1876. DR. To outfit, viz— 70 hlids. salt; 151 lbs. Manilla; 238 lbs., sugar; 68 qts, beans; 85 lbs. dried apples; 58 gall. molasses; 13 gall. kerosene; 68 lbs. coffee; 25 lbs. tea; 54 lbs. lard; 191 lbs, butter; 1 bbl. pork; 8 doz. . mackerel lines; 18 bbls. flour; 6 bbls. beef; 2 feet wood, and other siml’r stores, etc --------------------------------------------------------------- $663 91 162 yds. $2 O. C. duck, at 310----------------------------------------- 50 22 Coal------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12 75 Towing, $4; railway bill, $27,90-------------------------------------- 31 90 Blocks, etc., $5.55 ; stores, etc., in bay, $42.30 -------------. e s m = s. s = m = e is 47 85 Expense on trip, $20.67; skippership, $66.06.----...------------. ------ 87 23 Railway bill, $22.75; anchor, etc., $2.30------------------------------- 25 05 Blacksmithing, $9.14; rigging, $20.85--------------------------------- 29 99 Calking, $7.25; sailmaking, $194,58 ---------------------------------- 201 83 Tin Ware, $17.03; painting, $56,09.------------------------------------- 75 12 Sparmaker's bill, $8; teaming, $11.83.-------------------------------- 19 83 1,245 68 CR. g By flour sold on trip.---------------------------------------------------- $30 00 Share of trip ------------------------------------------------------------ 832 09 Sundries (split wood, tar'g and scraping, etc.) ----------------------------- 13 63 Loss on trip------------------------------------------------------------- - 369 96 1,245 68 Q. In making this up, did you include anything for the captain of the vessel ?—A. Yes. We make up the loss as is done in corporations; that is, the captain, whether interested or not in the vessel, has his share and wages, which are always charged in. This is a separate account from that of the voyage, altogether. - Q. When you say that a vessel has lost so much, do you include in this loss, interest on the cost of the vessel ?—A. No. That simply in- cludes the cost of running the vessel for the trip, with regard to outfits and outstanding bills. Q. Is insurance included ?–A. No. We never insure save very little. We cannot afford to do so. Q. What number of vessels had you in the bay in 1875?–A. Two. Q. What number of barrels of mackerel must a vessel take in order to make a voyage to the Gulf of St. Lawrence paying 2—A. Do you mean for a vessel not employed in other fishing % Q. Yes. If you decide to send a vessel to the gulf, how many barrels must she bring home in order to make the trip profitable %—A. That would vary some. I have known vessels that got 600 barrels which did not pay their bills; and then I have known vessels which got 300 barrels that did pay them ; I should think that it would take about 400 barrels to pay the bills of a vessel. Q. Without any compensation to the vessel owners ?—A. That would be before the vessel paid any profit as a vessel. Q. What is that reckoning the mackerel to sell for?—A. Well, ones would have to sell at $15, twos at $10, and threes at $8–$7 or $8, or thereabouts. Q. Generally speaking, how much value do you attach to all the fish- eries in the Bay of St. Lawrence as a business to be pursued—I mean the fisheries anywhere off the British coast 7–A. I do not think that any of them are of any value at all. Q. Which costs the most—the mackerelers that go into the gulf or 2884. AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. those that fish on our shore ?—A. The latter generally are the least expense. A. Q. I suppose that a Seiner is more expensive than a hook and line vessel ?—A. The gear of it is ; the gear is what costs most—not the vessel. Q. What costs the most, the manning of a seiner or of a hook and line vessel ?–A. The Seiner costs the most, owing to the value of the Se]Il 6”. , * Q. Does the extra cost of the Seine used on the shore make up for the extra cost of the bait used in the gulf º–A. The Seine costs the most—not the bait; but taking the trips on the average, going to the gulf costs the most. - - Q. Can an average vessel be run so that a person buying a share in her will get interest on his capital—considering this matter for a num- ber of years?—A. Do you mean taking such a share haphazard, or any way ? Q. Not haphazard; but take an outside owner who buys an interest in a vessel; can he make money by buying such property?—A. You cannot get outside owners to buy such shares now. Q. Why?—A. Because they have most always lost what they have put in. Q. How has the business of companies which have gone into the fish- ing business prospered 2 I do not refer to Gloucester fishing firms; but how have corporations, which have gone into the fishing business, suc- ceeded ?–A. They have been unsuccessful. Q. You gave me an illustration of one?—A. That was in Salem; I think they called it the Chincoteague Fishing Company. This was an institution got up to assist people to go into the fishing business in Sa- lem by Gloucester people who moved up there. Q. In hopes of restoring the fishing business of Salem 3–A. They wished to build the place up, and they represented that by carrying out their scheme, money would become plentiful in their streets, the retail stores would flourish, &c.; but they failed completely in their under- taking. Q. Gloucester people up there started a corporation in connection with the fishing business %–A. Yes. . Q. What became of it 3–A. I think they subscribed, and put in $30,000 and bought parts in several fishing-vessels—that is, the firm that went into the affair bought the vessels, and the outside owners put in $30,000, and took parts in some five or six or eight different vessels. I think that when they divided up they got back about 25 per cent. of what they had put in, without deducting interest or taxes or anything else. - * Q. On the winding up of the business?—A. Yes. Q. Did they have intelligent and decent people to carry on the busi- ness?—A. They were successful in Gloucester, and were men who car- ried with them when they went up there $15,000 or $20,000 or $25,000 cash capital, or capital so represented in vessels and material. Q. How are your Gloucester vessels, which are run by fishing firms, owned ?–A. Firms as such cannot own them, save as individual part- IlêTS. Q. The registration has to be made in the names of the individual members of the firm º–A. Yes. Q. Do the skippers usually have an interest in the vessels?—A. Not as a rule, but a great many of our skippers own shares in our vessels. Q. Do you keep a separate profit and loss account for the vessel to AWARD OF THE - FISEIERY COMMISSION. 2.885 show the result of running her as distinct from the rest of the busi- ness?—A. Yes. Q. Then you know whether your vessels, as such, make money or not ?—A. Yes. + Q. How is this?—A. Our own vessels up to this last year have gen- erally paid. 2 * Q. Do you mean up to 1877 ?—A. Up to 1877; yes. In 1876 they paid, though not very much, but up to that time they have paid as ves- Sels. Q. What has been about the percentage on the average?—A. Some- times they have paid very largely. I hardly know how to answer that question, but some years I know they have paid 25 per cent. Q. What was that doing 3–A. That was during the years of the war. Q. In what business?—A. They were employed in different branches of the business—cod-fishing and mackereling. Q. You have imported salt wery largely 2—A. We were for many years the only salt dealers there, and we have imported salt for 20 years. Q. That has been a very large part of your business?—A. Well, no, not a large part, but we have done the larger part of the salt business there. We have sold on the average perhaps 600,000 or 800,000 bushels a year. Q. Have you obtained the prices of salt for a series of years?—A. I have, since 1860. Q. Will you give them 3–A. In 1860, the average price was $2 a. hogshead. * Q. What prices are these ?—A. Those at which we sell. - Q. To anybody that comes for a barrel ?—A. No; but wholesale. In 1860, the average price was $2 a hogshead, measuring 8 bushels; we never weigh it, but we measure it. In 1861 and 1862, the price was also about $2 a hogshead; in 1863, it was $2.25; 1864, $33; 1865, $6.50; 1866, $4.25; 1867, $4; 1868, $34; 1869, $24; 1870, $2; ; 1871, $23; 1872, $2.25; 1873, $24; 1874, $2.25; 1875, $2; 1876, $1.75; and 1877, $1;; making an average price of $2.76, for these 18 years, for a hogshead of 8 measured bushels; that is, in American currency. By Mr. Davies: jº- Q. Including the duty ?—A. There is no duty on it; it is in bond. During the years from 1860 to 1866 the prices include the duty, which I think was taken off in 1866 but this did not go into operation until 1867, though we had the privilege of procuring our salt on board of the vessels in bond, while salt obtained on shore was charged the duty. By Mr. Eoster: Q. During the last two years, the price of salt has been very low 2– A. Yes; it is low now. - Q. Your firm have been large buyers of fish 7–A. Yes. Q. It has been the larger part of your business—buying fish from vessels?—A. We have bought more than we caught. Q. Do you buy mackerel ?—A. Yes. Q. Describe how you buy them on the American coast when a vessel comes in with a trip 7–A. We go to the wharf and buy the fish as the trip runs, paying different prices for the different numbers. Q. Is there competition in this respect between the different firms ?— A. There is between the different buyers; the competition generally comes from outside firms. The firms which have vessels generally pack their mackerel. Q. This is after packing”—A. No; not always. It depends on the 2886 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. state of the market. We sometimes buy ahead, and sometimes to arrive, and I, have known mackerel lay on the market for 2 months Sometimes. * Q. How large a quantity of mackerel costing, say, $20 a barrel retail, will the market of the United States take 2 How large a market is there for high-priced mackerel ?—A. This is very limited. I should not say that over 5,000 or 6,000 or 8,000 barrels of this mackerel would be so taken ; the quantity might perhaps go as high as 10,000 barrels; but I Would be afraid to hazard that number as a calculation. The market Will only take a very limited quantity of this quality. Q. Where is it taken 3–A. Principally by the leading hotels and res- taurants, which have it on their bills of fare. Q. At what figure must the prices of the other grades range in order to secure free consumption of them 3–A. Well, they have to be a cheap article of food, and range lower than all other fish and other products of the United States which come into direct competition with them. Q. What must the prices be per barrel ?—A. When the price of num- ber two mackerel, for instance, which is a staple article, gets up to $9 a barrel, it sells hard; and we find that the trade do not then want it. Q. What must number one be sold at 2—A. If their price was $15, a large amount of this quality could not be sold. - Q. We notice a very large range of prices in the price-list for mack- erel; what do you say to that ?—A. I do not know as I understand it. It is owing probably to quality, some. Q. It is a speculative article with respect to price?—A. Yes; I think it is. I think that the prices of mackerel are as much influenced by speculation as by the catch. - Q. You think so 7–A. Yes; I do. I think I can prove that and give an illustration of it. Q. Let us have it.—A. I think that in the year 1870, if I mistake not, we had the next to the largest catch we ever had in one State; my im- pression is that the catch that year was over 300,000 barrels—318,000 or 320,000; and I think that prices were higher that year than they have ever been any year that there has been a small catch. I think this was owing to the fact that in 1869, 1868, and 1867 there was a small catch; prices had ruled pretty high, and there had been a considerable demand; and in 1870, when there was a very large catch, the speculators just Operated in them and kept prices up. Q. Were these high prices maintained ?–A. No. I think that No. 1 bay mackerel, in the fall, were bought by us at $22.50 and piled away Over Winter; and I think that the next May and June they were sold down as low as $4, $5, and $6 a barrel, the same fish; and I think that shore mackerel, which had sold as high as $24, were then sold for about the same price. Prices had been carried above what the people would give and they would not take them. Q. Of late years can mackerel be carried beyond the autumn months Without loss %–A. No. The way the demand has now turned, we have the best demand the time they are caught ; that is to say, August mack- erel will sell best in August, September mackerel in September, and October mackerel in October; and when you get through that year and come on to the next year, the demand almost ceases. The market, in this respect, is entirely changed to what it used to be. Q. And through the winter and spring there is hardly any demand 7 —A. Well, when you get into April and May and June there is no de- mand, and holders then get rid of their fish in the best way they can. From 1855 up to 1865 it used to be the direct reverse. We used to have AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2887. the best demand in the summer months and June. I have bought old mackerel in July and August that were caught the year preceding, but to pay Very high prices for mackerel now from the commencement of the year would be throwing money away. Q. Is the demand for salt mackerel as good now as it was years ago 2 —A. No, not nearly so. Q. To What do you attribute that ?—A. To the inland fisheries. Q. Such as what?—A. The white and siscoe or lake herring fisheries. Whitefish have formed the largest element in the destruction of the de- mand, of late years. Q. To what regions has salt mackerel gone for consumption ?—A. To those near and in the large cities on the sea-coast, such as Boston, New York, and Philadelphia, and to Baltimore, to a limited extent; and then they have gone inland. Q. What quality do the cities take 3–A. Always the best quality, With the exception of Baltimore, which always takes the poorest quality. Q. Owing to a large negro population ?—A. No ; they are sent thence to the markets south of it, where they take small mackerel, which will. number out better than number ones. The price in Baltimore for medium threes is as large, I think, as for threes, and I do not know but as large as for twos, or, at all events, there is very little difference be- tween them. Mackerel threes sell better there than ones. Q. Retail?—A. I mean wholesale. Number one mackerel have been, of late years, almost unknown in the Southern market, where 10 or 15 years ago there used to be a large trade for them ; in the New Orleans market, for instance, a great many of them used to be sold. - Q. You spoke of inland fisheries; what do you say with respect to fresh fish from the sea?—A. That trade has been developed very much lately, and people will buy fresh fish before they will salt fish, codfish excepted. I do not think that the codfish trade has been affected so much in this direction as the mackerel business. The codfish trade seems to hold its own ; the demand for this fish has, I think, really in- Creased. Q. It has held its own 3–A. The demand for cod has increased. Q. Which do you regard as the more important article; the fresh or Salt-mackerel ?—A. They are about equal ; there is not much difference between them. Q. How far west do fresh fish go?—A. They go all over the Whole country. In fact, before I came up here they were making arrangements to take fresh balibut and mackerel in refrigerated cars over the United States in summer. I think that a very large trade in fresh fish could be developed. Q. And they do go as far west as the Mississippi!—A. Yes; and to California. I have known halibut shipped to Omaha and all round those Sections of the country. - Q. What do you say with reference to the catch of herring on our own Coasts º–A. Well, the catch of herring there has not been very large, and the price has been very low. I should say, excepting the annual catch during the last 5 or 6 years, 100,000 barrels a year would not be Very far from a right estimate, Q. It has been cheaper to buy than to catch them ?—A. Well, yes. Q. Is there a large supply of herring on our own coasts?—A. I think that at the present time the largest supply is off our own coasts. Q. You told me this morning something about the comparative price of a kind of herring you called round herring 2—A. Yes, round shore herring. - 2888 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What do you mean by round shore herring 2—A. This term is used in contradistinction to the term split herring; these are split down the belly, and the round are salted just as they come out of the water. Q. You have compared with me the price of them in the United States and the price here in Halifax; what do you say about that ?—A. There are very few of them in the Halifax market, and they are asking here $4 a barrel for them. The EHalifax round herring differs from the States round herring; the gills of the former are taken out and a small part of the entrails, and to do this costs about 25 cents a barrel. These her- ring are quoted at $4 a barrel; and we calculate to retail them in the States at $4; but we do not consider them at all. Q. Their price current in Halifax is higher than the price at which they can be bought in Gloucester ?—A. It is higher than we can sell them at to the retail trade. Q. Have your vessels been in the herring business %–A. Yes, more or less. Q. Where have they gone for them 2–A. To Newfoundland, the Mag- dalen Islands, and Grand Manan. t Q. Have they ever caught them in Newfoundland 3–A. No. Q. Have they gone there prepared to catch them 7–A. No. - Q. They have bought them 2–A. They have always carried money there to buy them. Q. How many vessels have you had go to Grand Manan for herring 7 —A. We have always had 2 or 3 go there in winter for them since 1869 or 1870. I am not sure which, but I think since 1870. Q. Have they bought or caught them there ?–A. They have always taken from $1,500 to $2,000 in American currency, to get a cargo, with 3 or 4 hands. They have carried no fishing gear and they were always supposed to have bought the herring. They always rendered account of them as being bought. Q. They went there without preparation to fish 7–A. They bought them undoubtedly. Q. And they left money behind them 2–A. They carried money, and that they used it on their voyage I have no doubt whatever. Q. You have no more direct knowledge in this respect 7–A. I have their bills, which come from the men down there, who made out the receipts. - Q. What has been the cost of the herring which you have bought in Newfoundland and Grand Manan 7–A. When they first went to New- foundland, which was, I think, in 1860, to Fortune Bay, they used to pay 6 Shillings or $1.20, in gold, a barrel. We used to have them carry part gold and part trade—that is, we used to fit out vessels to go there and we used to estimate the price at $1.50 a barrel, and take trade enough to amount to $1.50 a barrel, and always gold enough to reach the same figure. We used to use trade if we could, and otherwise we used gold. Q. They cost $1.20 a barrel ?—A. That is $1.20 in the first place, and over $2 during the last few years. Last year I think that the price was $2 or $2.50 per barrel—10 or 12 shillings. Q. Have you bought herring which were caught on the United States Coast 2—A. Yes. Q. How has the quantity which you have purchased there compared with the amount which you bought in Newfoundland and at Grand Manan 3–A. It has been smaller than the quantity which we have bought in Newfoundland and at Grand Manan and Magdalen Islands. Q. Have you purchased both frozen and salt herring 2—A. Yes. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2889 Q. You have also been in the cod-fishing business?—A. That has been the principal part of our fishing. Q. If you compared your cod and mackerel fishery, what proportion would you say is cod and what proportion mackerel?—A. I have the figures. Well, the mackerel would be a very small part of it. . Q. Are the figures on the table which you have put in?—A. Yes. Q. About what proportion would be cod, and what mackerel!—A. The cod is over two-thirds of it. Q. Which has been the more profitable %—A. The cod always. Q. What do you say about the comparative expediency of fishing for Cod with fresh or with salt bait on the Grand Banks 3–A. That is a pretty hard and difficult question. I can only answer it from our expe- rience with Our Own Vessels. Q. I only want your general idea respecting it?—A. Well, I think that if the vessels do not use fresh bait, and do not make a practice of it, they will do just as well with salt bait; but if part of them used fresh bait, the whole of them have to do so; that would be my judg- ment. - Q. I meant to have asked you, before we passed from the herring business, whether anything is done in the exportation of herring from the United States?—A. We made one shipment, I think. Q. Where 3—A. To Gottenburg this last spring. Q. Others began the business in 1876?–A. Yes; the year before. Q. Are the herring which are exported caught on the United States shore ?—A. They are caught both there and in British waters. I should say that one-half of those which are exported are caught in British Waters. ** Q. We have had some testimony as to the running expenses of ves- sels; what does it cost to run cod-fishing vessels that go to Georges Bank, by the year; and in the first place during how many months of the year are they there?—A. This varies a great deal; cod-fishing Ves- sels would probably be for 9 months at Georges Bank, or 8 months would perhaps be a fair average. • Q. What would the running expenses be for a vessel which is there 8 or 9 months, for the year 2—A. Well, I think that our vessels there have cost us on the average $2,300 or $2,400, not including interest or taxes, or, for the larger part of the time, insurance or depreciation. Q. You mean money actually paid out 2–A. I mean that is the amount of the actual bills of the vessel, nothing else. Q. What is the yearly expenditure per vessel for anchors?—A. These entail very large bills. Q. How much are they on the average 7–A. I do not know, but the º bill in this respect is entailed in the cod fishery at the Georges ank. - Q. How many anchors would you lose per year 7—A. Well, the num- ber varies. Vessels which do not lose more than an anchor a year would be considered very fortunate. Q. Have you had occasion to purchase any mackerel from a provin- cial Vessel this summer, caught while fishing off our coast 2—A. Yes. Q. What was her name, what did she do, and what did you buy 7– A. She had been seining, and I think her name was the Harriet. She belonged somewhere about Shelburne or Lockport, or somewhere about there. She was seining on our shore, and we bought mackerel. Q. Where was this at 3–A. At Gloucester. Q. She brought them there?—A. Yes, and landed them at our wharf. We bought them before she landed them. 2890. AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. What does an anchor cost 7–A. This year they cost six cents a pound, and an anchor will average 600 pounds for a vessel, without the stock. The price for an anchor has this year been $38, and the price has been as high as fifteen cents a pound. Some years the same anchor has cost $90. Q. That is for the anchor and chain part 2—A. It is for the anchor and stock, and for nothing else. - - Q. What does a cable cost 3–A. About $2 a fathom this year. I think that a cable of 250 fathoms would cost this year as near $500 as could be calculated. - Q. How many cables have you in your vessel ?—A. We generally have one spring cable of about 250 fathoms in length. Q. How often has it to be renewed ?–A. They are not renewed much over once in two years. We generally have to buy from 100 to 150 fathoms of cable every year for a vessel that is following the fishing right along. by Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Where are they made 3—A. In Boston. They are spun and are made of manila. We do not use chains at all. By Mr. Foster: Q. Your business expenses cover the period when there was as well as when there was not a duty on fish & You did business previous to, during, and subsequent to reciprocity, and since the Treaty of Wash- ington, and I want to know whether, in your judgment, if the duty of $2 a barrel were reimposed on mackerel coming from the provinces into the American market, it would come out of the provincial fishermen or out of the people of the United States ?—A. It would come out of the provincial fishermen, I should say. * * Q. How near prohibitory would a duty of $2 a barrel, put on all grades of mackerel, be found 3–A. I should think it would destroy all the profit and make their business unprofitable. It would tend that Way. Q: What would be the effect of a duty of $1 a barrel on provincial herring 2—A. That would be total prohibition. Herring do not some- times sell in the market at over $2.50 a barrel. Q. What has been the effect of admitting herring from the provinces under the treaty as to the herring business % To what extent has the business of sending herring from the provinces to our market grown. up since the duty was removed ?–A.. I think it has increased. Q. Was it very large or was there any of it when the duty was on ?— A. I think it was then very small—there was hardly any of it at that time. Q. Have you vessels engaged in the halibut fishery 3—A. NYes; but only incidentally. The vessels that fish for cod on George's Bank always bring in more or less of halibut. Q. Fresh or salt 3–A. Fresh ; the salt halibut comes from the Bank. Q. This has never with you been an exclusive fishery 7–A. No. Q. How many vessels go from Gloucester to catch halibutº–A. The fleet this year, I think, numbered 31 vessels. Q. From your own knowledge you do not know where those vessels go ; but, speaking from report, where have they gone?—A. Of late years they have gone off into deep water off the western edge of the Grand Bank and to the southern part of Saint Peters's and Quereau Bank as it falls off toward the gulf. The fishing firms always follow AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2891. where the vessels fish, in order to know where they go and to keep Watch of the Voyages. - - w Q. Have you known of any considerable number of them going in the vicinity of Cape Sable or Seal Island 3–A. I never heard of any going there. - Q. What does it cost to build a fishing-schooner at Gloucester by the ton 7–A. I think that a schooner of 100 tons, old tonnage, would cost about $7,000 or $7,200. Q. Old tonnage is carpenter's measurement?—A. 100 tons old tonnage would average from 66 to 70 tons register. Q. You think it would cost over $70 a ton 2–A. Yes; we built three vessels this last season, and I think that they cost us about that. - Q. What do you include in the cost of the vessel ?—A. Everything, exclusive of the fishing-gear—cables, anchors, and all those things. Q. Can anybody get this done any cheaper than yourself?—A. I do not know about that. Q. No one has more facilities for getting it done cheaper, of course. How does the character of the vessels built in Gloucester for the Glou- cester fleet compare with the fishing-vessels built in the provinces 3—A. The former are better than the latter in every way. Q. Explain in what particular 2—A. They are better built and better modeled, and their material is better. Q. And what material is so used up here ?—A. I do not know, but it is some soft wood or other. I never inquired much about it. Q. Could you estimate the difference a ton between what you should suppose it would cost to build a mackerel-fishing schooner here and such cost in Gloucester ? I do not mean built here; but suppose a ves- sel was built in Gloucester as they are built here, what would this cost here 3—A. I do not know. That would be a pretty hard thing to tell. I do not think that you could get a man there to build a vessel in that Way. - Q. What has been the conditions of fishing towns in Massachusetts, aside from Gloucester'?—A. I think their business has decreased. Q. Name these towns as they occur to you ?—A. I think that Man- chester, the town nearest Gloucester, a great many years ago, had from 12 to 13 vessels which went to the Banks, but now none are owned there. Beverly used to have, I think, about 50 vessels, which number is reduced to about 26 or 28. Marblehead used to be a very large fishing place ; I think that at one time from 60 to 70 vessels were owned there ; I think that originally this was the largest fishing place in Massachusetts; but now its fishing business has almost entirely gone. Q. What is Marblehead doing now %—A. It has gone into the shore business. Plymouth used to be a very large fishing place, owning from 60 to 70 vessels; but this number now has fallen off down to 20 or 30, I think. The business of these towns has decreased all round, with the exception of Provincetown, which has held her own ; they have there made fishing their principal business altogether. I think that Province- town has held her own, but all along the other smaller towns have lost about all their fishing business, which has become centralized mostly in Gloucester. * Q. Has the fishing business of Wellfleet increased"—A. No ; she has lost her cod-fishing business, and now only follows the mackerel busi- Ile SS, Q. You mean by fishing business, anything ?—A. Yes; anything in the shape of fishing. e Q. Both cod and mackerel ?—A. Yes. 2892 AWARD (OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. The general result is that as Gloucester has increased the other fishing, places have decreased ?–A. Yes. Q. If you cannot make money in the fishing business in Gloucester, is there any place on the continent where it can be so made 7–A. No ; if it cannot be made there, then it can be so made nowhere. Q. You have all the appliances necessary in this connection?—A. Yes. Q. And you know your business %–A. Yes. - Q. You have said that your vessels have done well up to this year, and that sometimes they have made as much as 25 per cent.; and I would like you to state more fully the business which your vessels have done and the way in which they have made money.—A. We never, with my father, went anywhere except on our own shores; and he always, I think, from the time he commenced business, made a great deal of money in the fishing business; but we only went on our own shore exclusively, and have only taken the bay fishery and the mack- erel fishery as incidental. We have done very well, for the reason that We have been on our own shore when other vessels were in the bay, when the bay fishery was followed more largely than is the case at present. Q. Your firm is undoubtedly the most prosperous and the largest in Gloucester 7—A. I would not say that. Q. Is there any doubt about it ; there is no doubt about it 7—A. We are called so. Q. Did you have a brother who went out of business a few years ago 3–A. Yes; he went out in 1865, I think. He was the one who went out of our firm in 1861, when our firm dissolved; he then went into business by himself, and was in business in 1862, 1863, and 1864, and I think he went out in 1865. Q. Was he by himself?—A. Yes; he was for four years by himself, and then he retired altogether. Q. I want to know whether you, yourself, would not have been better off at the present time if you had followed your brother's example, and retired in 1865?–A. Yes; I would then have been better off to-day. By Mr. Davies: - - Q. What did your brother retire on, or withdraw from business on ?— A. When he retired from our own firm * * Q. Yes.—A. I think on something like $25,000 or $30,000, or there- abouts. - Q. What share had he 3—A. One-third of the profits of the business. Q. Exclusive of vessels 7–A. Yes; he owned part of the vessels, all of which were mackerelers, and he took his stock. Q. During how many years had he been in the business?—A. I think he went into it in 1853. Q. And he retired in 1861?—A. From our firm ; yes. Q. Worth $30,000 or $25,000 —A. Yes. . Q. Your firm owned about twenty vessels 7–A. Yes. Q. What would be the average price of these vessels 7–A. This year? Q. Well, yes.—A. Values have gone down so much that it is almost impossible to select an average value right along ; but this year these vessels would be worth, perhaps, a little less than $5,000—perhaps $4,500 or $4,800. Q. All round?—A. Yes; that would be their average value. Q. This would be about $100,000%—A. They cost us more. Q. Did they cost you $150,000 %—A. I think so. Y Q. I suppose that you have large establishments there besides 2—A. €S. - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION, 2893 Q. Wharves, &c. ?–A. We have four wharves. Q. I suppose you have a quarter of a million invested in them 3–A. That would be a large estimate. ſ Q. Would $200,000 be a large estimate %–A. I think they cost us nearly that. - * Q. You spoke of a number of vessels engaged in the mackerel busi- ness; I understood you to mean that they were exclusively halibuting?— A. Yes; what we call fresh halibuting. - Q. I understand from the evidence we have had that there are other vessels which are engaged partially halibut and partially cod-fishing 2— A. Those are vessels which go cod-fishing and catch halibut on their Voyages, in Bank vessels. Q. The number 31 you mentioned does not include these other vessels which fish for halibut and cod promiscuously 7–A. No. Q. You could not give any idea as to how many are engaged, more Or less, in halibuting 2—A. Catching them on their trips ? Q. Yes.—A. Well, about 100 sail do so. Q. You, of course, never went halibuting yourself, and you do not know where they catch their fish *—A.' I suppose we have accurate information on the subject. - - Q. You personally never went on a halibut-fishing voyage 2–A. No ; save once, when I was a little boy and did not know much about it. Q. Mr. Foster asked you a few questions about the losing of anchors, and as to whether this ought to be charged to their voyages; George's IBank, I understand, is the place where most of the anchors are lost 3– A. Most of the anchors are lost there at certain Seasons of the year; yes. More are lost there in February and March than is the case any- Where else. Q. And a great many vessels would be there in February and March?— A. Yes; from 100 to 125 sail would then be there. Q. And when they lose anchors they lose cables too 3—A. You can- not lose an anchor unless you lose some cable, of course, with it. Q. Are not more lost on George's Bank than in all the rest of the fish- eries put together?—A. No. - Q. Where else are they lost so largely 7–A. On the Grand Banks; We also lose them very largely in the bay. Q. Whereabouts is this the case in the bay ?—A. We lose them around the Magdalen Islands, where our vessels usually fish. Q. You were speaking of a vessel from which you bought some mack- erel this year?—A. Yes. - Q. What is her name 2—A. I am about sure that it is the Harriet. Q. You do not know, of course, where they caught these fish 3–A. Yes; it was south off the coast of Long Island, and off that way. Q. How do you know that ?—A. The master told me so. I bought them myself. Q. Where is she registered ?–A. In the provinces. Q. Did she take thesefish offshore?—A. She took them off Long Island, She went south fishing; she came to my wharf to be fitted out. Q. You do mean to say that she caught them near the shore ?—A. NO; I think she got them from 8 to 10 miles from the shore, where our Ves- Sels usually fish. Q. You have expressed an opinion about the duty; are you a pro- tectionist or a free trader 7–A. I am protectionist. Q. Is the free admission of fish into the United States an injury to your fishermen 3–A. Yes; I think that it is. 2894. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. Why is it so 7–A. I think that it develops the Nova Scotian fish- ery, and makes for us a rival here. Q. That is a benefit to us; but why is it an injury to you ?—A. Be- cause if your fishery is kept down, the men engaged in it will come up from the provinces and go in our vessels. I think that the larger part of your best skippers learned their trade in American vessels. Q. Is that the only injury it is to you?—A. Well, the only injury— yes; only to have a rival in business is always an injury. If a man has a clear field, he always does better than if he has a rival. Q. Why? Does this affect the price at all?—A. What do you mean by price 3 s Q. The price you obtain for your fish when you sell them 3–A. Well, not much. I do not know that it affects the price a great deal. Q. Then it does you no injury Ż–A.-Yes; if it builds up an oppo- sition trade, it has such an effect. Q. How can it, if you get the same prices the while %–A. Yes; but then we have to catch more fish. i Q. The free admission of fish does not effect the catch 7–A. Cer- tainly it does. If you increase the product of fish in any particular di- rection, of course it has that effect. Q. I cannot see how the free admission of fish can affect your catch?— A. For instance, we go to the Grand Banks, and you now fit out vessels to go there; and to all the places where our fishermen go, yours also gC). Q. As to vessels mackerel-fishing, we are withdrawing from it 2–A. You have built up a mackerel-fishing fleet 2 - Q. The evidence is the other way ?—A. During reciprocity, for in- stance, quite a large fleet of vessels was built up along Lunenburg and about there; and when the Reciprocity Treaty was abrogated, I think that quite a number of vessels were left on the stocks, if I am not mis- taken, and were not built and finished for one or two years afterwards, though when they were commenced they were intended to be fishing- Vessels. * Q. You are giving your impressions, I suppose; you do not profess to Intimate that you know this to have been the case ?—A. Well, I know it as well as I know Nova Scotia to be down here. - - Q. Were you then there present"—A. Parties that were there told me of it. Q. You have it from hearsay?—A. Parties owning them, or who were having them built, told me so. * Q. I am speaking of mackerel-fishing vessels; and the evidence is to the effect that our mackerel-fishing fleet instead of increasing has been decreasing in number?—A. That is the case everywhere; it is general. Q. Is the number diminishing very largely 7–A. Yes; it is so on our OWn COaSt. t Q. So the free admission of fish does not develop our fisheries in that respect; 10 or 12 years ago we had 30 or 40 vessels from Prince Ed- ward Island engaged more or less in the fisheries, and now we have hardly any vessels so engaged; that seems to point the conclusion in º opposite direction ?—A. That is because the business is not profit- a. O16. - * Q. But, so far from that being the case, the business has doubled and quadrupled 10 or 20 times over ?–A. The mackerel business? Q. Yes.—A. Where 3 Q. We have 20 times the capital engaged in it now than was the case AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2.895 10 years ago on Prince Edward Island?—A. Well, it requires 10 or 20 times the capital to get the same amount. & Q. Do I understand you to state that the free admission of fish caught in British waters into your markets does not affect the price º–A. I do not think that it affects the price to any extent; indeed I do not think that it does so at all. I do not think that this affects the price a graln. •, Q. You differ a good deal from most of the witnesses we have heard.— A. I will tell you why I think so. It is because the price for consumer does not change at all. I do not believe that the price of mackerel, to the man who eats them, has changed a cent for the last ten years. I Consider that the price of mackerel depends to a great degree on the manipulators—the dealers in them. I do not think that the question of duty on or duty off makes one fraction of difference as to the price; , this is, however, influenced by many things. If you took the duty off One year and put it on again the next year, I do not think that it would alter the price one fraction, though some other influence might come in and do it. If there was a change in this respect every year, I do not think that it would affect the price one grain. We took the duty off potatoes, which were brought from Prince Edward Island, for instance, during reciprocity, and instead of having cheap potatoes in consequence of this, during that ten years potatoes were higher in the provinces and all over the States than was previously the case. I think they were Sold here in the provinces at the rate of $1 a bushel. Q. What is your opinion concerning the price of mackerel in this regard 3—A. It is that a duty would not change the price one fraction. Q. I understand you to mean that if the catch was one-half below the average, and if the demand could not be supplied by the catch at all, or if, putting the case in an extreme light, the catch fell to one- eighth, and there was not enough fish to meet the demand, still the price Would remain the same.—A. It would not then vary save very little. We have an illustration of it this year. Now, the catch of mackerel this year has been smaller, I think, than has been the case for a great many years. The price of No. 2 mackerel, for instance, for a time went up to $10 and $11 a barrel. They were bought up, and the price the fishermen asked for them was given, but still the consumption almost stopped and decreased with no catch on the market; and I have known a man with 20 or 30 barrels on the market, when I have some- times bought 10,000 barrels in one day, hunting round for a buyer. Q. Was not the year 1874 a year remarkable for a very large catch?— A. In 1874 there was an average catch, I think. It was nothing more than an average, I think. If I am not mistaken, the catch for 1872 and 1873 was small. •3 Q. Do you remember it sufficiently to state whether this was the Case or not ?—A. My impression is that there was about an average catch in 1874. * - Q. We have the evidence of several witnesses who state that the Catch that year was very large.—A. Still it was large, compared with the catch of 1875; but taking the catches for a series of years, this was not the case. Q. How was it in 1873?—A. In 1872 and 1873 the catch was small Compared with that of 1870. Q. It was larger in 1874 than it was for the year immediately pre- ceding 2—A. Yes. Q. How were prices that year 7—A. In 1874 prices were about fair. Q. Are you sure of that ?–A. Yes. 2896 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Q. I know that the catch for Prince Edward Island was very large that year, with very low prices.—A. Well, the island fish are poor fish. Q. That may be, but that is not the question at all ; I am asking you Whether the catch was large that year or the price small ?—A. They mostly all say that the catch in 1870 was the largest catch but one that we ever had, and the price that year was the largest we have had ; you cannot form a calculation that will work uniformly from year to year. Q. I understand your evidence to be that no matter what the catch is, the price will remain about the same 2—A. No ; I did not say that. Q. What did you say ?—A. In 1870 we had the largest catch but one which we ever had, I think, in Massachusetts; it numbered, I think, 318,000 barrels, and No. 1 mackerel ruled that year, I think, at $20 a barrel; while in the next year, 1871, there was about an average catch, and yet the price was then from $4 to $5 lower than it was in 1870, with a very large catch ; and in 1872 and 1873 there was a small catch, if I mistake not, and I think that the prices were that year about the same. They did not vary, save very little, from 1872. Q. The catch does affect the price, in your opinion ?—A, I say it does Some ; but then I say there are a great many things which influ- ence the price, such as the manipulations of operators, and all those things. Q. Is the rise or fall in the price more owing to the manipulation of operations than to other causes 3–A. I do not say that ; but all these things operate. Q. To what extent do you think that the catch affects the price; is not the price of mackerel, like that of every other article, governed by the laws of supply and demand; if the supply fails, does not the price go up 7–A. That would be the case if the selling price was always so governed ; that would be the case if the price to the consumer was al- Ways governed by the selling price ; but this is not so in the case of mackerel. - -. Q. You say then that the price to the consumer always remains the Same 2—A. The price to the man who eats them does not vary, Save very little. - Q. That is not affected by the catch at all, in your opinion; the price to the consumer remains the same 2—A. It has been the same for the last ten years. * Q. You think so 7–A. I know so. Q. You do not know it; your evidence does not agree with other evi- dence.—A. I know that is so, because I have had experience in the trade. - Q. You say that the price is uniform, and that, in your opinion, the catch is not affected by it 2–A. The catch does not affect the price which the consumer pays; that has not affected it one fraction during the last ten years. I mean this is the case as regards the man who eats and buys them. - . Q. The catch, in your opinion, would not affect that price?—A. It ha not done So during the last ten years. Q. Would it do so, in the course of trade, in a long period of time 7– A. If competition was sharp, it might reach that point, but it has not done so as yet. - - Q. If the catch was reduced to one-eighth, would the consumer, in your opinion, then pay exactly the same for his mackerel which he would pay were it otherwise?—A. They would not pay any more for them. . Q. He would pay the same 2—A. I think so; the price is generally fixed at the highest price that will be paid. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2897 Q. The demand for fresh mackerel has increased a good deal of late years?—A. It doubles and quadruples every year. - Q. A considerable portion of the catch on the American shore is sold in the fresh state %–A. Well, yes; I should say that a large portion of it is so Sold, and it is increasing. & ** Q. And that necessarily opens the door for the sale of salt mackerel ?— A.. I think it shuts the door. Q. Do you think that the consumption of fresh fish takes place in the States in the West ?—A. No; it does not go West. - Q. I thought you said fresh fish were carried as far as California 2– A. Yes, fresh sea-fish. Q. That is what I am talking of, fresh mackerel; it is a sea-fish?—A. Yes. Q. Is its consumption spreading all along the railways?—A. Yes. Q. And through all the towns 2—A. Yes; at certain seasons of the year. Q. The necessary result is that this takes up a portion of the catch on the American coast. You said a large portion of it was consumed in the fresh state %–A. Well, it is. You mean to say that the catch. of fresh mackerel, which is a large portion of the whole catch, affects the catch of fish off the American coast. Q. I understood you to say that a large portion of the catch is con- sumed in the fresh state 3—A. Yes; it is, however, not the greater, but a large part of the catch which is so consumed. Q. Was this statement which you have put in made up by you per- sonally 7–A. It was made up by my brother. Q. Is he in your firm now %—A. Yes. Q. What is his name 2—A. John J. Q. Is this his handwriting 2—A. No. Q. Is that the handwriting of Mr. Low, who was here the other day ?—A. Yes. - Q. Then it was not made up by your brother, but by Mr. Low 7–A. No ; that is a copy of what was made up by my brother. I do not know if I have the original in my pocket, but I have it all on one sheet. Q. Is this the form in which your brother made it up 3—A. Yes. I want to keep the other One. & Q. You do not know how he got at the values, do you ?—A. They are taken from the stocks of fishing-Vessels; that is, when the stock of the trip is netted; that is, deducting the packing and other expenses. This is the net stock which is divided among the crew and owners. Q. This is the valuation at which you settle with the crew 2–A. Yes; that is what is divided among the owners and crew. Q. This does not purport to be the value at which the fish were after- ward sold in the market 2—A. That is part of the price we would obtain in the market as dealers. (). This does not purport to be the price at Which you sold the fish 2– A. Not as dealers; no. Q. As Pew & Sons 7–A. It is the price at which the fish would be sold at if they were sold at the time to a person outside. Q. It does not include the packing-out at all ?—A. No. Q. You afterwards pack the fish and sell them in the market 2—A. They are packed and all that is taken Out. Q. I understand that when a vessel comes in the vessel packs off and then settles with the men, and these are the Values at which such settle- ments were made 3—A. Yes. Q. The fish are afterwards placed on the market; and this settlement 182 F 2898 AWARE) OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. does not show what you got for them 3–A. I do not know that it does, as dealers. - Q. If you feel any satisfaction in drawing the distinction between yourselves in that case and as dealers, do so.-A. There is a marked distinction between these two positions. Q. Is the packing out included in this statement 3–A. No. Q. How could it come out if this is the valuation which you settled with the men; I understand that this does not represent in the slightest degree what you got for the fish, but that it represents the fixed figures at which you settled with the crews, and does not embrace the packing Out at all, or what you got for the fish ; am I right in making that as- Sumption ?—A. No ; it is an assumption, just as you say. Q. Then I am right in it 3—A. It is an assumption, because you say it is the price of settlement. º Q. Am I right in saying that you settled with the crew at that price?—— A. Yes; of course. Q. Where, then, am I wrong in that assumption ?—A. You say that is the price which we would fix, and at which we would settle with the crew, without regard to anything we got; and I say, in that respect, it would not have any regard to what we got in our separate business, as dealers and retailers; it relates to the packing of the trip, the selling of it wholesale, and the paying of the crew, the highest wholesale price which the fish would bring at time, if sold to anybody, per trip. We then take the trip and sell it at the price which would be brought by the disposal of it in small packages to different parties in the retail trade ; this is a separate business. Q. This represents, of course, the price at which you settled with the Crew for the mackerel ?—A. Yes. * Q. And it is not the price at which you sold the mackerel in the mar- ket 2—A. Not as a retailer or dealer. - Q. As Pew & Sons, carrying on the fishing business in Gloucester, this does not represent the money received for mackerel when sold 7–A. As dealers, no ; there is a distinction between the two positions. You judge it as if we settled with the crew at one price and obtained another price, thereby acting dishonestly. Q. Not at all.—A. It would be so understood. Q. Where would the dishonesty lie 2–A. You say that this is the price you fixed and at which you settled with the crew, without regard to the price you got ; and unless that was explained the men would say we did not obtain the price we ought to have secured ; and I want the matter set right. Q. Some of these are mere estimates ?—A. They are actual figures. Q. Some of them are mere estimates ?—A. Only one of them is an estimate on the different numbers; the aggregate number is correct. Q. Can you tell me the length of time each of these vessels was in the bay, and their length of time in the shore-fishing 3–A. Well, the average Q. Hold; I do not want the average; you have given a list of ves- sels, 5 in number, which in 1870 were in the bay, and of 8, which were the same year fishing on your shore, and I desire to ascertain the exact time which was spent by these 8 vessels on your shore ?—A. It would be about the same—about 4 months. Q. You say generally, about ; was the time occupied in the bay about the same as was the case on your shore ?—A. Certainly. - Q. What was the tonnage of these 8, compared with these 5 ves- sels 2—A. It was about the same ; they were, perhaps, the same Ves- Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2899 sels which went one year on our shore and the next year into the bay, changing their voyage. They were the same vessels precisely ; Some fished on our shore one year and the next year in the bay. Q. Sometimes vessels going into the bay make very short trips, and at other times this is not the case; there is no particular average for their trips in the bay ?—A. Of late years the mackerel fishery has been prosecuted longer on our shore than was previously the case ; this has been so since we commenced seining. The vessels during this period have gone south to fish. - Q. Would that be about an average of the trips in the bay and on your shore?—A. Yes; I think that is the exact time which they are usually gone. Q. Others make 3 trips ?–A. I should include all the trips in the One. Q. You are not able to name the actual vessels which went, and the actual period of time for which they were gone?—A. No ; not now. Q. Could you do so 7–A. Yes. Q. Within a reasonable time 2—A. I could do so in a Week’s time. Q. It was during the war you made the highest interest on your in- vestment 7–A. Yes. f Q. That was during the Reciprocity Treaty 2–A. During the latter part of it. - Q. Is it customary to charter vessels in Gloucester"—A. It is not a general custom ; it is done occasionally. Q. Have you ever done it 2—A. Yes, I have chartered vessels. Q. From Gloucester?—A. From Gloucester people. Q. Fishing-vessels?—A. Yes. - Q. What did you pay per month ?–A. When we chartered a vessel, which was some time ago, I think we paid $250 a month. Q. Did you get the vessel already fitted out for that sum ?—A. Yes. Q. Is that chartering a usual or an unusual thing 2—A. It is an un- usual thing. Q. Very unusual 2–A. It is not customary; it is not the general practice. - Q. That was a fishing-vessel you chartered?—A. I think for a fishing voyage. I have chartered herring vessels to go to Newfoundland. Q. You chartered vessels to go down and buy frozen herring in New- foundland 3–A. To go in winter. Q. I am speaking of mackerel-fishing. Do you know of any vessel being chartered for that fishing?—A. Yes, a vessel has been chartered this Summer. - Q. But excepting that vessel, have vessels been so chartered during the last ten years 3–A. They are chartered more or less every year. Q. For mackerel-fishing 2—A. Yes. Q. That System has been kept up 2–A. It is not a common practice, but out of the 300 or 400 vessels, some years perhaps three or four would be chartered and other years one or two; it is a small number. Q. When you were fishing for herring at Newfoundland and Grand Manan, how did you enter them in your market 2—A. As merchandise. Q. As American herring 2—A. No ; we went under a register, and entered them as British products. Q. Did you pay any duty on them 3–A. No ; fresh fish for immediate , consumption are admitted duty free always. Q. When you spoke of paying $250 per month for the charter of a Vessel, did you mean it to apply to the winter or summer season 3—A. To the summer season for mackerel. 2900 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. By Mr. Whiteway: Q. Have you ever carried on herring-fishing yourself on the southern coast of Newfoundland 4–A. No ; vessels we own have gone there. Q. When did you commence the business of sending them there for herring?—A. In 1860 or 1861; 1860, I think. Q. In what month did you send them 3–A. They start about the last of November and come back as quickly as possible, usually arriving home in the early part of February. Q. Between 1860 and the present time, how many vessels, on an aver- age, have you been in the habit of sending there every winter ?—A. |Usually two or three every year, right along from year to year. Q. Have any of your vessels taken nets to catch herring 2—A. Never. Q. You employed the people to catch herring for them 3–A. We bought them from the people. Q. Those are frozen herring you refer to ?—A. They were bought, as I understand, and the vessels froze them. Q. What do you do with the herring ?—A. They take them to New York and sell them retail in the markets as fish-food, and some are sold for bait. Some are also sent to Philadelphia and sold for food. Q. What proportion do you say goes to New York—nearly the whole?—A. I should say New York and Philadelphia, on an average, take two-thirds of them—the larger part of them. Q. What did you pay the people of Newfoundland for herring last winter?—A. I think up to 6, 8, 10, and 12 shillings; the prices went up, . for herring was scarce. Not more than two-thirds of the vessels got loads, consequently they forced the prices up to $2.50 per barrel. Q. Have you not bought them as low as 50 cents and 75 cents a barrel?— A. They have never been bought so low. The first year the American vessels went there they were bought for 3 shillings or 4 shillings. Q. What is the lowest price paid by you ?—A. One dollar—6 shillings. Q. As far back as 1860; are you sure about that ?—A. Yes; pretty clear on it. Q. The lowest price you paid was $1%—A. Yes; I am clear about that. Q. You have heard of others having paid 80 cents 7–A. The first year the business was started I think they were bought as low as 80 cents; as soon as American vessels commenced to go there the price went up to $1 and $1.20. Q. Has it been a profitable trade with you ?—A. Profitable at the early part; unprofitable at the last. Q. But still you keep sending the same number of vessels 2–A. A. man does what he has usually been doing. * Q. Have any of your vessels fishing on the Grand Banks gone into Newfoundland for bait 3–A. Yes; they have made a practice of late years to go in. Q. When did they commence that practice?—A. My impression-is, in either 1874 or 1875. I am not certain which year, but three or four years ago. sº Q. The difference between the twenty vessels and those that have gone to the bay, have been employed on the Banks cod-fishing?—A. Mostly off our own shores, on the Georges, cod-fishing. Q. How many have been on the Grand Bank 3–A.. I think the first vessel I had on the Grand Bank was in 1870 or 1871. We have gone from one vessel up to 6, which number We have there this year. Q. I believe you said that cod-fishing with you had been, on the whole, very prosperous?—A. It has been the best part of our business. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 290ſ Q. Have you any bills or accounts with you as to what you paid for bait on the coast of Newfoundland 3—A. No. & Q. How many times on an average each year would a vessel go in for bait 3–A.. I should say that some of our vessels would go in once and others three times in one trip. I should think they would go in almost. three times on an average. Q. What bait have they got?—A. Herring, squid, and I am not sure. whether they got caplin or not. - Q. Can you say as to what was the amount paid by each vessel for bait for the year 7–A. It would be an estimate. I have the drafts with me that I paid this year. Q. Have you made up an average %—A. No. Q. Judging from your knowledge, can you approximate the amount º —A. I think I can. I should say we paid from $2,000 to $2,500 this present year. Q. Was that for baiting vessels?—A. Yes. Q. Was that all paid for bait or did it include other articles 2—A. The large part of it was for bait. Q. What proportion?—A. There is only an amount paid for light-dues at Newfoundland. - Q. Were there any other supplies purchased by you ?—A. No ; we always fit out the vessels ourselves with the necessary supplies. Q. Do you buy everything for cash 7–A. Always for cash. Q. You will barter anything?—A. Never. They draw sight drafts on. By Mr. Davies: Q. I think you said you did not think the British fisheries were of any value 2–A. I think they are of very little value. - Q. Then if you were excluded from the bay, it would be of little mo- ment to you ?—A. Yes, if your people were kept from our shores and markets. - Q. Without considering the question of market; if American fisher- men were excluded from the bay, it would be very little injury to them?— A. It would be very little. * Q. Do you wish that to go on record as your opinion ?—A. Yes. Q. Can you then explain the previous anxiety displayed by them to get the inshore fishery in the bay ?—A. No ; that is something I should like somebody else to explain. I never could understand why our people wanted it. In 1863, 1864, and 1865, which were the most prosperous years in the bay and when our vessels did the best they ever did there, our vessels on our own shores could make three dollars where they made two dollars in the bay; and yet the men wanted to go in the bay. They always used to go ashore at Prince Edward Island, have a dance and a good time. * Q. You think it was due to the attractions of the island?—A. I think so. Q. The loss on the voyage in 1876 you place in the statement at $369?— A. That is a statement of the trip copied from the book. By Mr. Foster: Q. Was the license fee of $1 per ton, in your judgment, as much as a mackerelman going into the Bay of St. Lawrence could afford to pay for the privilege of the inshore fishery in the best years?—A. I think it. WaS DOOI'ê. Q. You have been asked as to the longest of the trips. You have- given the results in the bay and the results on the shore from 1870 to 1876 inclusive. I want to know whether this represents the case of VeSSels which fish through the whole mackerel season in the respective- 2.902 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. places?—A. Yes; it does. There are vessels that were fishing alto- gether on the shore, and vessels that were in the bay all the time they were mackereling, with the exception of last year. Q. Does it represent from June to October in the bay, and whatever the length of the season was on our own shore ?—A. Yes; the time they were in the bay, and the length of the season on our shore. Per- haps the vessels did not go in the bay till July. It has only been two or three years since the time has varied on our shore and in the bay. Q. You did not put vessels which had fished four or five months on our shore against vessels which had been in the bay for 60 days?—A. No ; it represents the whole bay fishery of the vessels. - Q. In those seven years you have had from Bay St. Lawrence $77,995.22 worth of mackerel, and from our shore $271,333.54 worth?— A. Yes. - Q. You have been asked about the settlement with the sharesmen at the end of the mackerel voyage. How is the price at which the mack- erel is taken by your firm determined ?–A. It is determined by the highest market price paid at the day of settlement. Q. If there is any dispute about it, how do you get at the market price 3–A. We always take the highest price paid ; it is determined by the sales at the place. - - - Q. Do you not have a chance to cheat the captain and sharesmen?— A. No. Q. Why not?—A. Because it is publicly known what the sales are. Q. The right of packing is reserved by your firm º–A. The prices are made after they are packed. Q. Reserving the right of packing to your firm, if your firm cannot give as much for the mackerel when packed as others will, have you any right to give only part of the price?—A. No ; we are compelled to give the market price. When one master wishes to keep a trip in view of an advancing market, then in that case the judges decide what the trip should be valued at on the day the fish were ready for sale, and the crew Will be settled with at that rate. If the market is dull and the crew insist on a settlement, the owner has the privilege of taking the Crew’s half, putting them on the market and selling them, and at that price the crew will be settled with. Q. In regard to bay and shore mackerel, how have they compared for two years past?—A. Ever since I can remember, with the exception of two or three years, the shore mackerel have always been the best and brought the highest price. Those two or three years were excep- tional, and bay mackerel then brought a higher price. | Q. You are a mackerel buyer'?—A. Yes. Q. Have you bought mackerel in the provinces 3–A. I have bought provincial mackerel, but not in the provinces. - Q: When there was a duty on provincial mackerel, and a man bought mackerel at Halifax, would he have to pay the price of that same mack- erel in the United States, or would you pay $2 less?—A. You would always buy at $2 per barrel less. Q. Have you bought any mackerel since you have been here 7–A. I have tried to buy some. Q. As to this matter of the corner-grocery prices of mackerel, you Say that the retail price to the man who eats mackerel has not varied for the year, however the price in the market has fluctuated ?–A. It has not varied for mackerel or codfish, materially. Q. A man who wants to buy mackerel for his family does not buy a barrel ?—A. Perhaps one or two pounds, or one or two fish. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2903 Q. And the retail price for that quantity is still the same 2—A, Yes. Q. I suppose if I buy a salt codfish to make fish-balls for my family it will stay at the same price to me for a good many years, not With- standing extreme fluctuations in the market 2—A. It will hardly Vary. Q. The retailer may make or lose money 2—A. The jobber generally gets the difference. Q. The man selling me cannot raise the price on me much, unless there is a long-continued advance?—A. It would not make much differ- ence on two pounds of fish whether there was an advance of one or two dollars per barrel. s - Q. Then if the price goes down what is the effect to the retailer?—A. He does not make as much money. Q. Mr. Davies, I think I understood you say that you had Vessels which went fishing for halibut and cod indiscriminately—catching them promiscuously. Explain.—A. I meant that we have 20 vessels which go fishing for halibut exclusively; those are what we call fresh-halibut vessels. We have vessels which go to the Georges for salt codfish, and the bulk of those in pursuing their salt-fish voyages will get 10, 8, 5, 6, 3, or 100 or 200 pounds of halibut, and they bring them home fresh. Q. No great part of the vessels going to the Georges fish for halibut as well as cod?—A. A very small part. I have vessels which have not got a single halibut. Q. When you spoke of paying $250 a month for chartering a vessel, you spoke of her being all fitted out. Did you mean fitted out with hooks and lines and seines?—A. No ; I had reference to the vessel only. Q. You did not include outfit 3–A. No. By Mr. Davies: Q. Did I understand you to say that this statement of a voyage is copied from the record in your books of an actual voyage 3—A. Yes. Q. Have you a similar account opened for each schooner in your books?—A. Yes. - Q. That represents the charges against the trip; not only the marine slip, but painting, calking, and supplying it with anchors 3–A. Yes, against that voyage; we want those things. Q. You don’t presume to say that those are properly chargeable against the quantity of mackerel taken on that trip 3–A. Yes; they are charges that come out of the trip, that are incidental to that trip. They ought to be larger. - Q. Why?—A. Because the vessel had been in the winter to New- foundland, in the spring to the West Indies, and was ready to go on a fishing Voyage. - - - - Q. Among the items, $162 is charged for duck?—A. That would pro- bably be for a stay-sail. Q. And fairly chargeable against one trip 7–A. Certainly, the vessel would have to have it. - Q. There is sail-making, $1943—A. Yes. Q. A spar-making bill, $8. Do you think these charges fairly represent the charges against a vessel for the trip 7–A. They vary somewhat. Those are actual charges made against the vessel on that trip. Q. Would not the account be made up at the end of the year 3–A. The account is made up for the voyage. There might be in the sail- maker's bill some charges which ought, to go in the spring trip, and Some expenses paid in another year should be charged against this trip. They vary a little always. - Q. Then it does not represent truly the charges that ought to be 2904. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. against this trip to see whether the trip was boma fide a profit or loss?— A. No, because they might be greater or less. Q. In your capacity as dealer you make a profit on the packing out 3–A. Yes. Q. So, though there is nominally loss, yet practically you did not sustain a loss?—A. Yes, we did. We packed out on that trip 167 barrels. If you find the packing charge, it is, I think, $175, and We could not possibly make more than $30 or $40 out of the packing. Q. From the other trips made during the year the charges against the vessel would be reduced, and consequently at the end of the year the result might show a profit 3–A. Against the trip to Newfoundland there was charged a quantity of duck, and I know we had two Sails that were used in the bay trips. Part of the sail-maker's account Should go against the bay trip. - r By Mr. Foster: Q. There seem to be $1,245.68 charged on the debit side of this account, and $661.94 as an offset for certain items, though they are not Carried out. That was the actual cost of the articles 3–A. The figures were taken from my books, under my direction. Q. That account for each vessel is kept in order that you may know how your business is going on ?—A. Yes. - Q. The suggestion has been made that it does not accurately repre- Sent the precise results of the particular voyages, because some expenses are charged here which would not always be charged, and of course that is true. . But how much is the variation ? Run your eyes Over the items, and let us know to what extent the amount would be likely to vary, taking a number of years?—A, This account ought to be larger. te - - Q. Explain what you mean.—A. I mean to say that the vessel was partly fitted for the trip when she went in. For instance, she was painted on deck, and her rigging was in perfect order, and she had part Of her stores on board, which had been paid for on preceding voyages. This account is a smaller account than it would actually be if the Vessel had not gone previously anywhere else. Q. If Mr. Davies will send anybody to Gloucester, he can have access to examine your books?—A. Yes; and I shall be very glad if he Will Come and take some shares in our vessels. By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. You have mentioned the year 1870 as one of very high prices for mackerel and at the same time a very large catch 2—A. Yes. . Q. In 1871 prices were exceedingly low %–A. Yes. Q. Do you know that 1871 was the year when the Washington Treaty was made 3 Do you think that would have any effect in reducing the prices 3–A. Not a great deal. - Q. Your opinion is that notwithstanding the large supply of fish that came in in 1870, and the readmission of Canadian fish provided for in the treaty, it did not really affect the change in the price 7–A. No ; I lay it altogether to speculation in the article. I know that, because we got very badly bitten. By Mr. Foster: Q. What was the date of the break in the prices?—A. They were car- ried along till about April or May, 1871. - By Sir Alexander Galt : Q. Mr. Hall told us that the prices broke in December, 1870 ?–A. We Award of THE FISHERY COMMIssion. 2.905 carried that year 50,000 barrels of mackerel and held them right along at the high prices—at the prices they were nominally on the market; but no sales were made after January or February. - Q. Did you not expect the prices to fall when British fish were ad- mitted ?–A. I did not consider the British fish at all. By Mr. Dana : Q. In keeping an account for a vessel either by the trip or month, you charge to that month or that trip the expense that has been incurred within that period ; of course, the benefit may extend over the next trip 3–A. Yes. Q. For instance, in this account the spar-maker's bill is very small, while the sail-maker’s bill is rather large ; in the next trip the accounts might be reversed ?–A. The accounts of our other vessels all through the whole year, and the profit or loss on the vessel, will not be deter- mined till the end of the year. This, however, was a vessel of which the master owned half, and he had his voyage always made up when it was completed, whether from the Banks or Newfoundland. Q. In keeping an account of a vessel, it would be difficult and too much a matter of speculation to distribute the cost of a jib or jib-boom Over two or three trips, and calculate the percentage %—A. Yes. Q. To keep such an account would be an impossibility ?—A. It would be very difficult. Q. So you charge to each trip the expenses incurred on that trip 3– A. We usually go over the debit and credit accounts as they stand in the ledger about three times a year. There is no settlement made, but we ascertain the condition of the vessels, for instance, in May, August, and October, and we take that into account in our future calculations. Q. You make those inquiries for your own benefit 2–A. Yes; in the management of Our business. By Mr. Foster: Q. Did you look over Major Low’s account of Pharsalia 2–A. No. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. In regard to the register of vessels and ownership, I did not quite understand you. Tor instance, a corporation and partnership, as you are, you are obliged to have your vessels owned by individuals, in order to have them registered 7–A. The partnership business is a business where we are on equal terms. The vessels we own are registered by us 3.S OWIO €1’S. - Q. Do you own them individually?—A. We each own parts of differ- ent vessels. All three own parts in the same vessel; but my father owns more vessels than I do, and I own more vessels than my brother. Q. I thought they were owned separately. The company owns them, but they are registered by the individual partners ?—A. The company does not own them as a company, but they are owned by us as indi- Viduals. - - Q. The register is in individual names?—A. Just as they are owned. The register shows the owners. -- By Mr. Davies: Q. Do licensed fishing-vessels require to enter at the custom-house, Or are they exempt 3–A. They do not require to enter and clear after they are licensed, unless they are doing foreign trade. Q. When they confine themselves to legitimate fishing they are not required to enter or clear 7—A. No. 2906 Awarp OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg: Q. Is there any difference in the cost of building the same vessel in your port and in the ports of the provinces?——A. No. I should think it will cost fully as much, and perhaps more, to build in the provinces as good a ship as we build. It will cost fully as much, at any rate. Q. In regard to halibut-fishing by cod vessels. Are those halibut caught on their way to fish for cod, or do they fish specially for them?— A. NO. Q. You spoke in regard to salting halibut; do you often salt them 7– A. We do always on the Grand Banks. Our vessels for salt cod always catch more or less halibut, which they put into salt. One vessel on one of its trips brough] back one-fourth of its fare as flitched halibut from the Grand Banks. * - By Mr. Foster: $º. Q. Do you say you could not build a vessel of the same kind in the provinces cheaper than at Gloucester 2—A. You mean that taking a white-oak vessel you ask me whether they can build it cheaper in the provinces than we can. By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. Is there any difference in price in building vessels in our ports and there 3—A. There are different kinds of vessels. - Q. is there any difference in the cost of building vessels; take the same vessel ?—A. No ; very little. It is only a question of the labor, and that is a very small amount. There is a shipbuilder in Maine who claims he can build them cheaper than they can be built in the prov- 1IlC6S. By Mr. Foster: Q. That is quite contrary to what we had supposed to be the case. I would like you to justify the opinion.—A. They have not the material in the provinces to build what we call a first-rate ship. They have not any White oak. - Q. Where do you get your white oak 7–A. Our white oak we get from New Hampshire and Massachusetts. Our hard pine comes from the Southern States. Q. Take such vessels as are built in the provinces, are they built at less expense than those at Gloucester 7—A. They are cheaper-built fish- ing-vessels. They use a cheaper-built fishing-vessel in the provinces than we do; but for the same vessel, I have my doubts whether it can be built cheaper in the provinces than in the States. * By Mr. Davies: Q. Do you make that statement with regard to the present time & Ves- sels built, say last year, and those now building, are they inferior ves- sels to United States fishing-vessels º–A. Yes. .k. Q. Do you know what vessels have been built at Shelburne and Yar- mouth during the last two years 7–A. I have seen them. Q. And you still say they are inferior vessels?—A. Yes. Q. You wish to be understood as referring to the vessels themselves 7 —A. I understand you take what I call a vessel—the quality of the Wood, and the workmanship put on the vessel. Those vessels I do not consider So good as Ours. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2907 Witness handed in the following tables: Schooner General Gramt. [Sailed June 8; arrived October 27, 1876; 43 months.] 19 66-200 barrels mess mackerel, at $17,00---------------...--------------. $328 61 118 36-200 barrels No. 1 mackerel, at 14.50---------------...----...--------- 1,713 61 26 100-200 barrels No. 2 mackerel, at 7.00.----...----. .----. -------------- 185 50 2 100-200 barrels No. 3 mackerel, at 6.00.----------------. -------------. - 15 00 1 57-200 barrels rusty mackerel, at 3.75-------------------------------- 4 81 8 barrels slivers, at 2.00-------------------------------- 16 00 Bait Sold on trip ----------. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 29 00 167 159-200 - 2,292 53 *-* *-*-* IEXPENSES. Packing 167 159-200 barrels, at $1.75- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * $293 65 . 31 barrels slivers, at $3.50------------------------------------------------- 108 50 10 barrels slivers, at 5:00------------------------------------------------- 50 00 10 barrels clams, at 4.25.---------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 42 50 30 barrels slivers, at 3.00--------------...----. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 90 00 22 barrels water, $3.30; 2 feet wood, $1.-------------, ---------------------- 4 30 Tarring and scraping-----------------------, ----------------------------- 10 00 Water, James Bowie ---------------- _* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * º ºs ºs is sº in 1 35 Hoisting 175 barrels.----- “ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --------------------------- 2 63 Widows and orphans ------------------------------------------, ---------- 4 22 * 607 15 17 men's shares. -- - ------------------------------------------------- 853 29 Schooner's half---------------------------------------------------- 832 09 2,292 53 JOHN PEW & SONS. Retail price of salt at Gloucester, from 1860 to 1877. 1860------------------ $2 per hibd. of 8 measured bushels. 1861.----------------- 2 “ £ 6 1869------------------ 2 By Sir Alexander Galt: Q. In the return concerning lost vessels, do the coasters include the herring-fishing vessels 7–A. No. The herring-fishing vessels all run under fishing licenses, with permits to touch and trade; these are papers issued from our office, allowing vessels to pursue any business under the laws of the United States. The coasting paper and the fishing license are different papers, confining, of course, those who run the vessels to sail under them, and to do such business as is specified in these licenses. Q. Do vessels which take out fishing and trading licenses frequently change their business %—A. They cannot do so; they are not allowed to do it; they can only pursue the business for which they take out a license. A permit to touch and trade is given only for one voyage. Q. If a vessel goes to Fortune Bay with a fishing license, and a touch and trade license, and returns to Gloucester, can she go out again with- out renewing her license to touch and trade 3—A. A fishing license is given for one year; and a touch and trade license for a voyage; and at the end of such voyage, the vessel surrenders that permit. This permit is a peculiar paper, intended for that business only. Mr. FOSTER. Unless I have made some accidental omission, may it please the Commissioners, the case of the United States is now closed, with the exception of the case just spoken of, to wit: I propose, if per- mitted to put in, in case they come within a week, detailed reports from the inspector-general of the State of Massachusetts, showing the number of barrels of mackerel which have been packed in the State of Massachu- setts, during a long series of years, which I think may be valuable, going bāck, in fact, I do not know how far. I understand that the fisheries statistical books of the British provinces are in the case. Mr. THOMSON. Yes. * Mr. FOSTER. That is all. _A_TEXTE2EN IDIX IMI. AFFIDAVITS PRODUCED ON BEEIALF OF THE UNITED STATES. - No. 1. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISEIERIES TO BE PRO - POUNDED TO ON BEEIALE OF TEIE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside? Freeman Hodgdon; age fifty-two years, I reside at Boothbay, State of Maine. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 7 I pursued the business for twenty years. I have been in all the Waters frequented by American and Canadian fishermen. 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportnity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. Yes. Thomas Berry has had more ex- perience in the fishing business than any other man on Our coast. John Hodgdon, Joseph Maddocks. 4. A copy of the treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18, to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 I have. x 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington 7 Cod, Mackerel, Hake, Hallibut, Herring, and many others of less importance. 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, in- clusive” If you can do this, please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. The quantity is very great. I do not know exactly. 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? I cannot tell. I should think the value of fish caught 187 F 2978 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. by American subjects and that caught by British subjects was about equal. 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State; and if so, to what extent and value 2 They do to a small extent. - 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington & I cannot tell. 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fish. eries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually & I think not. e 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them " I do not know. 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion Con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries” Nearly all are deep-sea fisheries. Occasionally they find it ad- vantageous to fish in-shore for mackerel, but they can usually do better outside, even for mackerel. 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries? Mackerel and Herring chiefly, and sometimes Cod- fish. - 15. If you state that the inshore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits * Much the larger part are taken off shore. There have been many years when the in-shore fisheries for mackerel were worthless. The fish played off-shore the whole season. 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the Summer season especially are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore?' The larger part are taken outside of the in-shore limits. Mackerel are found in the Gulf in Summer and not in-shore. * . 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial inshore waters ? Perhaps the inshore fishery for Mackerel is injured somewhat. But the great quantity of bait thrown over by American fishermen inshore tolls the fish in, and so makes it the more convenient for Canadian fishermen. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large Quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone 2 I thirik they are. - - 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken & How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Porgies. It is all taken on the American coast. None is taken on the Provincial coasts. The principal part is taken within three miles of shore. 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2979 cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. Tofit out a hundred ton cod-fisherman costs from, from $2,000.00 to $3,000.00, and they make two trips per year, usually. It Costs a little less to fit a vessel for Mackereling. Our vessels are all manned upon the shares. - 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same question as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tWeen the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is, and the reason for it. They have the advantage of us in the cost of vessels, and in cost of salt. What the difference amounts to I cannot tell; but it is consider- ably in their favor. ** 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? I was master of a fisherman some twelve years, and fished off the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edwards, Island. 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Cod, Mackerel Herring and Hallibut. Princi- pally Cod and Mackerel. - 24, Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (Say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to. American fishermen ; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. I cannot answer this definitely. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value " But very little if any. - 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 3. If so, in what ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is, it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing- vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season & Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money- value of that advantage. They do, at the ports of Charlottetown, Halifax, the straits of Canso. The trade is quite extensive, but I can- not state its extent. 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels. are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken. there, what is the annual value of all the fish so, caught, and what is, the proportion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 2 I cannot tell. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles 2.980 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. of the coast; whence is such profit derived ; and in what does it consist 3 It is impossible for me to tell. Sometimes the advantage might be con- siderable: in other cases it would be nothing. 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate 7 I do not know how valuable the privileges granted by the Treaty of Washington may prove. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? I think it is more beneficial to the people of the Provinces. 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? I do not know. - 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market' I think it is the principal market. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive 2 I do not know. - FREEMAN EHODGDON. Sworn to and subscribed before me this tenth day of June, 1873. ORRIN MCFADDEN, Collector of Customs. No. 2. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISEIERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO ON BE EIALE OF THE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 Thomas Berry, age sixty-three, I live at Boothbay Me. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the Value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 2 I have been a fishing on the Banks and on the coasts of the British Provinces for fifty-one years. 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information " If so, please give some such name. Charles Reed. * x 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 I have examined the treaty. 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington? Principally Porgies and Mack- erel, would be sought for by the fishermen of the Provinces. We have also cod haddock hake, Hallibut, and many other kinds. 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2.981 sive? If you can do this, please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. I cannot tell. The amount is very great. The quantity taken on our coast by American Fishermen greatly exceeds the quantity taken on the coasts of the Provinces. 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington " Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. I am not able. 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington & The people of the Provinces take as many codfish I think as the people of the States. Of Mackerel we take far the larger Quantity, probably three times as many. They take the greater part of the Herring. 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of . your State 2 and, if so, to what extent and value? They get a great part of their bait from this State. They catch some and buy some. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? It is a great privilege. The Porgie bait which they procure from this State is far better tan . any other for taking Mackerel. 11, Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries Cause any detriment or hindrance to the profitable pursuit of these fish- eries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually 2 I think it would injure our fishermen very little. Neither would our fishing on Canadian coasts injure theirs. 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them ż I cannot tell. It is not large. 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic Coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- Sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of thein-shore fisheries? Certainly three-fourths are deep sea fisheries. 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries? Mackerel and Herring. 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or Chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken Within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-Shore limits 2 The off-shore fishery has been the most valuable for the last thirty years. t; 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore ? Much the larger quantity is taken outside the in-shore limits. Mackerel are generally found on the banks. When we can catch Mackerel off Shore they are of Superior quality to those caught in-shore. 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters? No, sir, they are not : it is an ad- Vantage to them, by tolling the fish in. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American Fishing-vessels, from which large 2982 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone 3. They are. The small fishermen of the Provinces are in the habit of following the American fleet. 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken " How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Porgie Bait. Taken on the coasts of this State. The greater part is taken within three miles of shore. The United States fishermen take none on the coasts of the Province. The fishermen of the Provinces will derive great benefit from the privilege of taking Bait on Our coasts, as they have none on their own. 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and man- ning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. It will cost to fit a vessel of one hundred tons from $2,000 to $3,000 for a codfishing cruise. For a mackerel cruise from $1,200 to $1,500. 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as ..you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference between the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. It would cost less. Salt, cordage, lines, and nearly all their fishing tackle costs less. And they can build vessels for much less than we can. 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? I am acquainted with the cod and Mackerel fishery. I have been skipper of a fisherman for the last thirty years. 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackerel chiefly. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (Say from 1854 to 1872, inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen ; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. I do not know. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada? If so, to what extent, and what is the value? They do not. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries? If so, in what ports, and to what extent? And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing- vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season 2 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. They do in the ports of Canso, Charlottetown, Port Hood and Halifax. They do this to a large extent; and will do it much more under the Treaty of Washington than ever before. Vessels will now refit there. The advantage of this trade to the people of the Prov- inces will be very great. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2983 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- Sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit " If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, What is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, What is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such Catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit? I cannot tell how many: it is a Very large fleet. The proportion which would fish within the three-mile limit is very small. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish Within three marine miles Of the Coast ; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it con- sist It is not worth over five per cent. We used to buy a license to fish inshore when we could buy them for fifty cents per ton. After the price was raised we could not make it pay to buy license. 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate, them to be worth annually, in the aggregate 2 I do not think they do. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are Concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? It is more beneficial to the people of the Provinces. 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? I do not know. They ship all their fat mackerel to the United States. 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the Only market 2 Yes. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. I do not know. The amount must be large. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them an- nually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. There has been Very little exportation of these articles to the Provinces during the last ten years. * 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject Which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please State it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. I believe that the priveleges of bringing their fish to our markets free of duty considering that they can catch them cheaper than we can will stim- ulate their fishing industries much more than the prevelege of fishing inland will stimulate ours. I also think that the increased trade which Will accrue to the Provincial towns on the coast will of itself compensate 2984 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. for all the detriment that can result to their fishermen from our inshore fishing. THOMAS BERRY. Sworn to and subscribed before me this tenth day of June 1873. ORRIN McFADDEN, Collector of Customs. No. 3. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISEIERIES TO BE PROPOUND. ED TO ON ..BEHALF OF TEIE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 (William Eaton) (58) Castine, Maine - 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish & Have been employed in the Amer- ican and Canadian, Cod and Mackerel fisheries, sixteen years 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. Capt. Joseph Stearns, Castine Maine, also Capt James Torrey Deer Isle Maine. 4. A copy of the treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 I have examined the above-named articles 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington? Cod, Halibut, Hake, Haddock, Menhaden Pollock and Herring - - 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. e - 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the treaty of Washington? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State? and if so, to what extent and value * They procure clam- bait and Menhaden, mostly by purchase. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in be- ing able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington º 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries Cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen ; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually * - 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2985 fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and Value, and the number of men employed upon them & 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion Con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries” The in-shore and deep-sea fisheries, in my opinion are of about equal value - 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in- shore fisheries º Mostly Mackerel & Herring, but considerable quan- tities of Cod Halibut Hake & Haddock are caught in shore w 15. If you state that the in-shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken Within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 2 One third in, and two thirds off shore. 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and not within Shore ? By far the larger quantities are taken outside the inshore limits 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American, fishermen to fish in Colonial inshore waters ? They are benefitted by the inshore fishing by reason of the fish being “tolled” inshore by the large quan- tity of bait thrown by the fishermen - 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing...in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone º There is certainly more fish caught • 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken º Eſow much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Clam bait and Menhaden is the principal bait, taken mostly on the coast of Maine and Massachusetts 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. It will cost for a vessel of 100 tons for a 4 months cruise $5,000, in the cod fisheries A vessel of the same size could be fitted and manned for a mackerel cruise for about $3,000 for the same period. 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is, and the reason for it. The cost of vessels fittings and maning &c. would not be so much be- cause the custom house fees on salt are not so much, the pay of crews is less, also the cost of bbls, cables, anchers, and some kinds of provis- iens are less. Their vessels cost about one third less than ours. - 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these 2986 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. fisheries? I am, or have been for a period of 15 years in capacity of Master of vessels engaged in the cod and mackerel fishiries 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington? principly cod, and mackerel. - 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say fro 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada? If so, to what extent, and what is the value? Not to a great extent. Some capelin, herring and alewives are taken. - - 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 3 If So, in what ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing- vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing Season & Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money- value of that advantage. They do obtain the articles mentioned above, in Port Hood Cape Canso, Charlotte Town, Port Mulgrave Molpeak, &c. 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing- Vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit? If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the proportion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of Such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 7 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it consist 3 In my experience the advantage has been very little. 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate 7 Drying and curing don't amount to much. The priviledge of transshipping cargoes is of some advantage. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? In my opin- ion the advantage is in their favor. 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all de- scriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat. herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the Only market. - - 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 298.7 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are, or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. WILLIAM EATON. CASTINE, July 5th, 1873 Personally appeared the above named William Eaton, and on oath Says that the foregoing statement by him signed is true to the best of his knowledge and belief. Before me WM. H. SARGENT, Jus. Pea. No. 4. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISEIERIES TO BE PRO- FOUNDED TO ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 L. G. Crane ; Gouldsborough Maine. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 7 Have owned fishermen, and have been fishing. - 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information? If So, please give some such name. Hadlock & Stanley. 4. A copy of the treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22, inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 I have examined them closely. 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Codfish, Mackerel, Herring Porgies, Halibut 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive 2 If you can do this please do so; and, if not, please state where that information can be procured ? Could not answer correctly. 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. I cannot answer this correctly. 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters 2988 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington & I think that both nations are on equal footings. 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State % and if so, to what extent and value? They do procure their mackerel bait. Bait for a vessel of 12 hands will cost three hun- dred dollars - 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington 2 - 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fish- eries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually & I think they would. - f - 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them " There never has been any, but probably will be equal to our own. 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries 2 Seven-eighths of our fishermen use the offshore fisheries. 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the inshore fisheries 7 Mackerel altogether. 15. If you state that the in-shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 2 One-eighth inshore }. º 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore? Much the largest quantity taken outside the three mile limit. • ‘ 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? Not any. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large Quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone 3 If it was not for the American fishermen the Canadian fishermen would be unable to get any fish in their small boats. * 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken 3 How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Porgies & Clams procured on the Coast of Maine—seven eighths within three miles of the shore. - 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail, the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port " A vessel of one hundred tons manned by fifteen men for three months voyage. Barrels $5,00. Salt five hundred bushels at $2.20 per Hhd. Bait $500. Victualling the vessel $300. 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2989 from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American Vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is, and thereason for it. The cost of the Wessel is not more than one half as much, and the outfits are not much more than half as much as our Vessels. 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? I own fishermen and fitted out fishermen, and have been fishing myself for 20 years more or less. The principal fishing in the provinces is Cod fish & Mackerel, and the greatest portion taken on the Banks. - - 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Cod & Mackerel. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. . 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value? They do not. - 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries? If so, in what ports, and to what extent." And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-wes- Sels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing sea- Son º Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. We sometimes procure barrels and bait and fresh provisions in Canso and many ports on Prince Edwards Island and at the Chaleurs. - 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing. Vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the Brit- ish North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, What is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of Such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit? Five hundred Vessels, average Value $7,000 each ; seven eighths without the three-mile limit. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles Of the coast ; whence is such profit derived ; and in what does it con- sist " None * 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any Valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before ; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate 7 None at all 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are Concerned, mere, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British 2990 AWARD OF THF FISHERY COMMISSION. North American Provinces as to the people of the United States? I think it is more: 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market. Yes 4 • 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this Subject, which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it, I think it is of a great deal more value to the Province than it is to the American fishermen, and eventually will be a great injury to the inter- est. Of the American fishermen. L G. CRANE, Reeper Segwin Light Maine Sworn to before me this 2d day of July, 1873 * E. S J NEALLEY, Collector. NO. 5. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO Bº PRO. POUNDED TO ON BEEIALF OF THE EINITED STATES. * 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 Henry E. Willard—35 years old—Reside in Cape Elizabeth. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic Sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 2 I have been a fisherman for twenty. , four years—master of a fishing vessel 9 years. - 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. Geo W. Willard, Caleb Willard, John E. Lovitt Morris Cobb, Isaac Cobb, & others 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States; known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed., Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 7 I have examined articles 18 & 22 of the “treaty of Washington ’’ 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the. Treaty of Washington ? Cod & Haddock, Mackrel, Pollock Herring, Pohagen, Halibut &c. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2991 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872 inclu- sive? If you can do this, please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. Cannot state. 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington 2 Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. All the kinds named in answer to question 5, which may be made of great value to the Canadian fishermen, as they are now to American fishermen. * § 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington " I cannot say. & 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the Waters of your State 2 and, if so, to what extent and value? They do obtain con- siderable bait in the waters of this State. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other re- striction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? Will de- pend on what extent the Canadian fishermen may pursue the fishing business in our waters. - 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our inshore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen ; and, if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually 3 Will open a competition for Winter and early fishing for supplying American markets. 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them 7 Cannot tell. 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries 3 Not one-fourth are caught in-shore. Chiefly caught out-side 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries? Mackrel—sometimes Herrings 15. If you state that the in-shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits” Not one-fourth of the mackerel Caught are taken in- shore. Chiefly taken out side. & 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore? They are taken chiefly out side the in-shore limits—on the banks and in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence. - 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in colonial in-shore waters ? I should think no material injury. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone" Yes for they rely chiefly on the bait thrown over by American fishermen. : --seers---wººg 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally 2992 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. taken 2 How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Provinces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Porgies are used chiefly for Mackrel Bait & Porgies are taken on the Coast of Maine almost exclusively within three miles of the Shore. - 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. For a season—of say three trips—Mackrel Fishing— (two months to a trip.) Will cost $2,500, for Bait, Salt & Provisions: & Eleven men at $40 per month—6 mos—32,640 in addition—Seins, lines, Hooks &c., $1,500.—Making $6,640 for 45 ton vessel costing $9,000 —or $2,210 per trip, without reconing cost of Vessel. - 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. Canadian Vessels are built of Soft Woods & cheaply fitted & cannot cost I think, much more than half as much as American fishermen—do not provision as expensively as American fishing Vessels. 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? Am acquainted with Nova Scotia & Prince Edwards Island fisheries—have fished there for four seasons. 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackrel Herring, Pollock, Cod & Hake. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (Say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. Cannot say. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value? Occasionally Herring for Codfishing—perhaps Valued at 103 a season for each vessel. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 2 If so, in what ports and to what extent " And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-Vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season? Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. American fishermen do procure the above supplies, at Gut Canso, Charlottetown P. E. I. Pictou N. S. Port-Hood—& some other ports, & this trade must be of considerable value to those Dominion portS. - 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-Ves- sels yearly engaged in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the Brit- ish North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2993 and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit " Should think that 175 to 200 Vessels ranging at 45 to 50 tons, averaging eleven men each, go annualley to the British Provinces for Mackrel & will average, I should think, 180 IBbls Mackrel each for the seasons catch—of which, more than ; are taken out Side of the “three-mile-limit.” - 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived ; and in what does it consist 3 I should think it more profitable for a vessel not to go within three miles of the shore—more fish would be taken, but the restriction is an annoy- a, Il C6. - 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washing- ton any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate 7 I do not think the gain of any great advantage to American Fishermen. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? I know that during the Reciprocity treaty, that several persons—citizens in the Gut o Canso (Charlottetown Port Hood) & other places got wealthy out of American fishing trade. & since its repeal those persons have lost all that trade—which I have no doubt this treaty will restore in a Iſl 63,SUIT'é. - g 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annnally shipped to the United States? Cannot 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market. the only foreign market for Canadians 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. - g H E WILLARD I solemnly and truly swear that the foregoing statements by me sub- scribed are true according to my best knowledge and belief. So help me GOd. H E WILLARD sworn before me this sixteenth day of June A. D. 1873. M. N. RICH (SEAL.) Dep. Collector of Customs. 188 F 2994 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 6. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISEIERIES TO BE PROPOUND- ED TO ON BEEIALE OF TELE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you re- side " Name Albert T Trufant Age, 39 years State of Maine Town of Harpswell Q. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish? I have been in the Business of By- ing & Cureing Fish for the last 13 years and have been in Gulf of St Lawrence a Fishing 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. * 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so * 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872 inclu- sive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fisher- men under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & Please state º in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each ind. r 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington? - 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State? And if so, to what extent and value 2 they do but I cannot State to What extent - \ 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fish- eries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually * I think it will as they can Bring their Fish in Free of Duty and they can Fit & have their Vessels at Less Cost than we can 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them? 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries } AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2995 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-Shore fisheries 2 for mackerel 15. If you state that the in-shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore : limits? in My Opinion their is not one Eight taken within the Shore Limmits of Three Miles. 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within Shore ? they are - 17. Are colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in colonial in-shore waters? they are not 18. Are not more fish caught by colonial fishermen, when fishing in- Shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone? they are 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken & How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Manhaden and I should Say that Seven Eights are taken within three Miles of the Shore as to the Value I cannot State but it is of considerable value as it is the Prinsable Bait used for Mackerel 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and man- ning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the Cruise. State as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. the Prinsaple Class of Fishing presude from Maine is the Cod Mackerel Fishery the relative cost of Fitting for Cod Fishing is from 1 to 3,000 as to sise of Vessel and the length of the time Occupide is from 4 to 12 Weeks and the Principle Cost is Provisions Salt & Bait. As for Mackerel Fishing it Cost less than for Cod Fishing to Fit the Vessells and their everage length of time to complete a Voyge is from 8 to 12 Weeks the Cost for Fitting for a Mackerel voyge is from 800 to 2000 as to beam & Sise of Vessel. * 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference betweet the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. As for Fitting and Manning Vessells from the Provinces they can be Fitted & run with a less cost than from the States in the first place there is no los of time as it takes from 1 to 2 Weeks each way to get to the Fishing Grounds and they can build their Vessells at a less cost than from the States as timber and all Material is Cheaper and also labor and they can presue the Fishing Business at a less cost than the Ves- Sells from the States in every respect. 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Que- bec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries 3 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are 2996 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Cod & Mackerel 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (Say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value 2 They do Procure Bait sometimes within 3 Miles of the Shore but the Value is but of little importance as it is Mostley Herring Fish and of but little Value except for Bait.' 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, Salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 7 If so, in what ports, and to what extent 3 And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing- vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season 2 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money- value of that advantage. They do Procure Suplies and also Ice, Salt Barrells &c. and it is of great advantage to the Provinces to Sell to the American Fishing Vessels they Buy in evry Harbor of any note in the Dominion of NovaScotia Prince Edwards Island Cape Briton & the North Shore of the Gulf of Lower Canada I Canot; State the Vallue but it must be a Large Amount 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing- vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the proportion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit. " I cannot State What Number of Vessels ar yearley engaged in the Fisherey of the British Provinces but should from 2 to 300 and they are Mostly Fishing for Cod & Mackerel the everage Crews Consist from 7 to 12 or 15 Men as to sise of Vessels and I should say that but one eight of the Fish are caught Within the 3 Miles limets of the Shore 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it consist” I should say that I do not consider 10 per cent is added to the privalige of Fishing within the 3 Miles limets and that consist of Mackerel & Bait taken within the limets 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washing- ton any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to re- pack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before ; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth an- nually, in the aggregate? - 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? I should consider it of More advantage to the Provinces as regards the Fishing interest than to the United States AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2997 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the father- ring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market. it does 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them an- nually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. - ALBERT T. TRUFANT. Attest : STEPHEN PURINTON. Personally appeared the within named Albert T. Trufant & mad Oath that the within instrument by him signed is true. Before me, STEPHEN PURINTON, Justice of the Peace. No. 7. f |CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PROPOUND. ED TO . ON BEEHALE OF THE UNITED STATES. I, Enoch G. Willard make answer to the several questions propound- ed to me on behalf of the United States, as follows. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 7 Enoch G. Willard,—reside in Portland, Maine—am 50 years old. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 2 I have been in the business of buy- ing and selling fish for over 20 years, and furnishing supplies and outfits " for fishermen, and have been an importer and dealer in Salt, Pur- chased over $400,000 worth of fish last year. - 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information 2 If So, please give some such name. S. B. Chase of the house of Dana, & Co. George Trefetheren, Henry Trefetheren, John Conley, Emery Cushing, A. G. Sterling, Geo. F. Lovett and others. - 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you examine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so. I have examined articles 18 to 22 inclusive of the Treaty. 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington. Cod, hake, haddock, macke- rel herring, porgies, are the principal. 2998 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive 2 If you can do this, please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. The kinds are stated in my last an- swer. The value of the fish purchased at this port, including cod-liver oil is about $2,200,000. Of the fish purchased here probably not one twentieth part are caught on that part of the Canadian coast thrown open by the treaty,+but what portion of the nineteenth-twentieths not so caught are taken upon the coast of this State, I am not able to state j. anything like accuracy, nor do I know who can—probably one- half. J 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington 3 Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. It is not within my power to give any definite answer or answers that I should feel certain about ; to the first question I will state the kinds of fish caught on the coast of Maine which by the treaty will be open to the Canadian fishermen. 1. Mackerel—this fishery is large and valu- able, and may be made so to the Dominion fishermen if they choose to avail themselves of the opportunities offered. These fish are taken on the coast of Maine before they reach the coast to the eastward and are sent to the Southern markets. It is now a valuable fishery to the Maine fishermen, and will be opened to Dominion use. 2. The herring fishery is large and important—especially on the Eastern coast. 3. The pogie fishery is very large. The most important district on the entire coast is Maine. The pogie taken here is fatter than any other and afford more oil. When the fishery is thrown open under the Treaty the Dominion fishermen will be at liberty to take pogies upon the coast of this State and enter into a large and profitable trade. Also to catch (especially in the winter) cod and other fish for sale fresh in the American markets in competition with American fishermen, and to catch mackerel early before they reach the Dominion waters, thus affording employment to the Vessels and fishermen of the Provinces at times when there is none - upon their own coast. - 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and, what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington & Cannot say. • - 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State; and, if so, to what extent and value? A considerable amount of bait is supplied from this State to Canadian fishermen; can’t Say how much. & ~ 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington & Cannot say. It will depend upon the enterprise of the fishermen. * 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fish- eries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually & Undoubtedly to some extent. There will be sharp competition in winter for our markets for fresh fish, and for mackerel early in the season. 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2999. fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them 3 Don’t know. 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries? More than nine tenths—perhaps nineteen-twentieths are out- side. - 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries? Mackerel chiefly—Some herring. * 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefl for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 3 Not over one fourth are taken within the inshore limits—three fourths or more outside. 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits ; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore ? Yes. More than three-fourths. Mackerel in the Gulph of St. Lawrence are usually found on the Banks. 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? I think not. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone 2 Practical fishermen can answer better than I. 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken 3 How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Pogie. Nearly all the mackerel bait is taken on the coast of Maine within three miles of the shore. 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and man- ning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. A vessel of 60 tons costs $2,500 to 3,000$ per an- num, for fitting, furnishing &c., and makes usually three cruises a year. 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference between the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. The cost of fitting out, &c., in the Dominion is not so large as in the United States. Cannot state the precise difference. Our fishermen generally consider the difference I think to be not less than 25 per cent. in favor of the Dominion. Reasons our vessels cost more—cost more to supply and Wages are less. - 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, With the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? I am as a fish dealer as before stated with most or all Of those fisheries. 3000 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackerel, herring and pollock. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. I have not the in- formation at hand that would enable me to state with accuracy. The catch in outside Waters is of many times the value of the catch inside as before stated. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value?. They do sometimes, but not to a large extent, 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 2 If so, in what ports, and to what extent? And if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the season 7 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advan tage. They do, and will more largely when the Treaty takes effect Will also buy fish by the cargo and in smaller quantity. It is a valua ble trade to the Provinces 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- Sel yearly engaged in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British Brovinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed an- nually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the proportion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken out- side of the three-mile limit 2 I have already stated the sorts of fish taken, those taken within the three mile limit would not be one tenth of all taken in those waters. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived ; and in what does it consist 3 Only for two months in a year is there any advantage, and this is mainly "confined to catching the per cent of Mackerel before stated. 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate % American fishermen do not repack fish until they º home—the other rights except transhipping cargos are of no Va. 1Ule. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more or quite as beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? Yes. I have no doubt of it a large portion of fishermen and fish dealers believe that without the repeal of the duty the former would gain as much as the latter, but with the repeal, the opinion is nearly if not quite univer- Sal among intelligent and practical men that the balance of gain, if any, is with the people of the Provinces. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3001 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? Cannot Say. t 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the Only market. Yes, the only market foreign to the Provinces. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please State them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Dont know. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classés, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject Which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, * State it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. I do solemnly, sincerely & truly swear that the foregoing Statements are true & correct to the best of my knowledge & belief. So help me God. t E G, WILLARD Sworn to before the * * M. N. RICH Dep. Collector of Customs (SEAL.) June 2, 72 No. 8. - ſoonFIDENTIAL. QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO ON BEEIALF OF TEIE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 Geo Trefethen, age forty-three. Portland Maine i. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish " I am a wholesale dealer in Dry & Pickled have been in the business twentyone years in Portland previ- ous to which worked at curing fish from my youth up. Am an owner in Six fishing Schoones and have owned more or less for twenty years, my father has been in the business sixty years 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. W. S. Dana, A. G. Sterling, C & H. Trefethen E. G. Willard and many others 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- º articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 3 I, 3, V6, 3002 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackerel Codfish Pollock. Hake Haddock & Porgies 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, in- clusive 2 If you can do this please do so; and, if not, please state where that information can be procured. I cannot state definately, and do not know where the information can be obtained - 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. I think the most valuable fisheries to be thrown open by the Treaty is the Porgie, which I should estimate to be worth a Million Dollars to the State of Maine And which we have now entirely as the fish follow the coast and are taken almost wholly within the three mile limit the next in importance is the Mackerel, which perhaps is realy of more Value but is not confined to the shore so closely, a large portion being taken outside the limit Codfish are mostly taken outside the three miles on Our COaSt. - 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the Waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington & I cannot State 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the Waters of your State; and if so, to what extent and value º They do, but cannot state to what amount. Porgies for Mackerel Bait has been quite largely shipped to N. S. from this State 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? I cannot tell. It will be owing'entirely to how far they avail themselves of the priviledges opened to them 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fish- eries by our own fishermen ; and if so, in what manner, and to what ex- tent annually ” If they should take advantage of our winter fishing, I think that they injure our fishermen by over stocking our markets with fresh fish, and thus reduce the price - 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them " I do not know, but think it is ...' limited at present, confined to a few Mackerel fishermen in fall of the year 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion Con- Sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries? All of the Cod are taken off shore and a large proportion of the Mackerel, say three quarters to seven eights. Herring are mostly taken in shore, also Pollock 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries º Mackerel principly, and will for Herring after the treaty takes effect 15. If you state that the in shore, fisheries are pursued wholly or AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3003 chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 2 I should say three quarters to Seven eights outside and One eights to a qarter in shore 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore ? Yes in the summer, say from June 1st to Sept 1st our fishermen usualy do better off shore, but in the fall after the 1st of Sept the Mack- erel usualy play in shore, and the weather being rough it is safer to be near a harbor 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters? I should say not, except in rare instances - 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large Quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone * I do not know. 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken º How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the Shore ? Porgies is the best bait for Mackerel, and is taken only on the coast of Maine and Massachusetts, and is all taken within three miles of the shore. 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the Cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail, the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. For Bank cod fisheries we use vessels of about 60 tons costing from seven to ten thousand dollars, we usually fit and pro- vision them for a voyage of two to four months with a crew of ten men. 1st we take 120 to 140 hlids Salt cost 300$ Bait 40 Brls. Clams, 3203 Nets lines & Hooks 1808 Provisions 500$ total $1300,—to which we add if they fish in dories which the most of the fishermen do late years 300$ for dories total 1600s, this for the first or spring cruise, if $1600 successfull usualy last two months the second cruise will cost less, say about 1000$ for two months if codfishing. if for mackerel in $1000 Bay St. Lawrence 800$. third cruise for Mackerel usualy cost $600 600$. Therefore if the vessel makes two Cod fish cruises and one Mackerel it will cost about 32005 if One Codfish and two Mack- $3200 erel 3000$ in rare instances we get a fourth trip, but as often only two. 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is, and the reason for it. I cannot State what it costs to fit out a vessel from the Provences, but have always understood that it cost them much less, in the first place they have cheeper vessels. And not so well provided and Provisioned. they are nearer home, and do not require SO extensive an outfit. and the men own and run their vessels, and are Satisfied with poorer pro- Visions than our people are, and many articles cost less in Nova Scotia. 3004 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. than in the States, vessels can be built for less, because wood and iron is cheeper. Salt is cheeper than any other articles 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries 2 only as a dealer and buyer of their fish & 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & Herring, Mackerel, Cod, &c. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen ; also, the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are no more than three miles dis- tant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. I do not know. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada? If so, to what extent, and what is the value 2 they do. Herring princapally for winter fishing which they purchase of the inhabitants and will continue to pur- chase, as the inhabitants can sell for less than our fishermen can catch them I do not know the amount, but should estimate it at ten thou- Sand dollars or more 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 2 If so, in what ports, and to what extent? And if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing- vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season 2 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money- value of that advantage. they do to some extent in Ełalifax, N. S., Bort Mulgrave & Port Hood, C. B., Charlotte town & Georgetown, P. E. I., and other Ports of less note, and will after the Treaty takes effect to a large eastent. It must be a decided advantage to people of those Ports to be able to supply our vessels with Fresh Provisions Potatoes &c. and I know that they felt it to be a sad blow to them when the former Treaty was abrogated, and I have been solicited by parties in trade at Halifax, Port Mulgrave and Charlotte Town to send my vessels to them for supplies, and have done So 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing- vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the Brit- ish North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of Such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit” “I have no statistics, of the above, |but should estimate, the number to be Five or Six hundred Valued at some Two hundred and fifty Thousand dollars, manned by some five or Six thousand men, Cod and Mackerel, should estimate the value at three Million Dollars in round numbers, and should estimate the amount taken inshore or within three miles at not more than ten per cent. or three hundred thousand, and I do not believe that it will exceed that amount after the Treaty takes effect. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3005 miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it consist " I do not think that I would pay one-tenth of One per cent for the privilege, in fact all the benefit that any vessel that I own in would derive, would be in being allowed to fish for about a month inside the limit for Mackerel When the Dominion Govt granted permits to fish inside the three mile limit to our fishermen, by the payment of fifty dollars for a vessel, some of our fishermen, payd that amount for the privilege, but when the next year the Dominion Govt raised the amount to One hundred Dollars, very few if any, would pay it, none that I was interested did. 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate 7 None for the right to land and dry their nets and Cure fish ; they may gain something in rights to land and transship Cargoes but I think the benifits to the people, where they are landed or transshipped would be fully equal to the benifit we derive. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more or quite as beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States? I, think it is decidedly in favor of of the People of Provinces, the right to bring their fish to our market free of Duty is worth more to them than all they give is worth to us. 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? I do not know. - 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the . only market 2 It does, and also a large part of the Large Codfish. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive I do not know. - 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. I do not know. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject Which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please State it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. I Will State in this connection that I have in my employ a number of natives of Nova Scotia, who now say they shall return to N. S. as by the treaty, and with the privilege of sending their fish to our market free, they can prosecute the business more profitably there than here. I Solemnly, sincerely & truly swear that the foregoing statements are true & correct to the best of my knowledge & belief. So help me me God. - ** GEORGE TREEETHEN. Sworn before me this 12th day June 1873 (Seal.) M N RICH Dep. Collector. 3006 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 9. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO —— ON BE EIA LE OF TEIE UNITED STATES. ~. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 John Conley. Portland, Me. age, 69 years. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the Catch of the different kinds of fish? I have been in the Fish and Oil busi- ness for the last thirty years. - 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. E. G. Willard; Geo. Trefethen & Co.; Henry Trefethen & Sons; Emery Cushing; A. G. Sterling & Co. . 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 I have. - 5. What kinds of fish frequent the wafers of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provision of the Treaty of Washington ? Cod; Hake; Cusk; Haddock ; Mackerel; Pollock; Herring ; Menhaden, or porgies are the principal kinds. 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. The kinds of Fish are as above stated. The value of fish and fish-oil is about two million dollars ($2000.000.) for Portland Sales. 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. I cannot state the amount Mackerel in large quantities and value. also Codfish; Hake, Haddock, Pollock, Herring & Pogies will be of great importance and profit to the Canadian fishermen. 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? I cannot say. 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State % and if so, to what extent and value? They procure large Quantities of bait and supplies; value not known. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? I cannot say, but think it very valuable. 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fish- eries by our own fishermen ; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually 2 I do not think it will, to any great extent but they AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3007 will have a chance to compete with our winter fishing, which is very Valuable. 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them ? I do not know. t 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries 2 About three quarters of the fishing is deep-sea fishing. 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries 7 Mackerel and herring, principally. 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in- Shore limits 2 Should think that less than one fourth part are taken Within the in-shore limits. { 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore? Cannot say. 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fisher- men to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? Do not think they are. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- Shore alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone? Cannot Say, but should think there would be. 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken & How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Provinces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? The best bait is pogies; nearly all the mackerel bait is taken on the coast of Maine and within three miles of the shore. 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. Salt, Lines, Provisions, etc. varying from One thou- sand (1000) dollars to three thousand (3000) dollars. They usually make from two to three trips per year. 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tWeen the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. Should think the cost of the Canadian would be much less than the American. 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries 2 I have been acquainted with the Nova Scotia and New Brunswick fisheries for about twenty years. 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are 3008 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & Cod and Pollock principally. - # 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (Say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. Do not know. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters Within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada? If so, to What extent, and what is the value? Should think not to any great extent or value. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries? If so, in what ports, and to what extent? And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season 3 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money- value of that advantage. They do purchase supplies in most all the ports on the fishing coast, and is consequently of advantage to the in- habitants of the different ports. * & 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing- vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the Brit- ish North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are SO engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 3 Cannot state how many vessels are employed or the amount of fish taken. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast;, whence is such profit derived, and in what does it consist? Only a small part of the fish are taken within three miles of the coast, and the profit not large compared with the outside fishery. 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washing- ton any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to re- pack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before ; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth an- nually, in the aggregate 7 Do not think they do, to any great extent. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States? I consider the advantage fully equal and beneficial. 31. What is the amount and value of Colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? Cannot, Say. 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market. I think it does to a large extent. - 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United. States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Cannot State. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3009 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in re- spect of it 2 I Solmnly sincerely & truly swear that the foregoing Statements are frue & correct to the best of my knowledge & belief—so help me God. JOEIN CONLEY Sworn to before me this 14th day June 1873 M N RIC EI * Dep Collector. (SEAL.) No. 10. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISEIERIES TO BE PRO- POUNDED TO ON BEEIALE OF TEIE UNITED STATES. & 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 O. B. Whitten; 34 Portland Maine 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 3 Have been in the fish business ten years \ 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. T. C. Lewis Abel Chase C. M. Trefe- than R. T. Sterling - 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States,. known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22, inclusive, and state that you have done so 3 Have examined the articles referred to above 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & Cod–Haddock Pollock Hake Mackerel Herring and Pohagen 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantites of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. Unable to state 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. Cannot say 189 F. 3010 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington 7 Do not know 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State'? and if so, to what extent and value? A very large pro- portion of the bait used by the Canadian mackerel fishermen is taken from the warters of this State 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? Cannot say $- 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fish- eries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually & As the Canadian fishermen can build fitt and man their vessells at an exceedingly less cost than American it would be a detriment to American fisheries because they could not compete with them 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them ? Do not know 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion consists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fisheries 3 Most of the large fishing vessels of this State pursue the deep sea fishing off the Coast of British North American Provinces for nearly five months and then a large proportion of the same vessels pursue the mackerel fishing … 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-Shore fisheries º Mackerel 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits? Should judge that seven eighths of all the mackerel caught are taken out side of the in-shore limits - 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America, taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel gene- rally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within Shore ? Yes 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? No 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large Quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone? It requires a continual throwing of bait to catch mackerel with a hook conse- quently vessels in the fleet do better than they would by fishing alone 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it princi- pally taken 3 How much of it is taken within three miles of the Shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Provinces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Pohagen—and all taken in American waters and most of it within three miles of the shore - 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and man- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3011 ning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the Cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of return- ing to the home port. It will cost to build and fit out a vessel of 100 tons for cod-fishing to be absent the average time—say three months $12000—For mackerel fishing $11550 - Cod fishing Cost of Vessel 9500 Mackerel fishing, cost of Vessel 9500 § { { % ‘‘ ‘‘ Provisions 1200 £ 6 { % ‘‘ ‘‘ Provisions 1000 & 4 § { { { £ 6 Salt 450 & 4 { { & 4 ( ; Salt 150 4 & { { & 4 { % Dories 350 & 4 & 4 & 4 & Bait 300 4 : { { ** * * Bait 500 { % & & ‘‘ ‘‘ Barrels 600 $12000 $11550 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is, and the reason for it. Should say that Canadian vessells can be built and fitted for nearly one half less than American—material for building is less—They use a poorer class of vessels and provision them at a very small expense 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? Acquainted with the cod and mackerel fisheries—" nearly ten years both curing cod-fish and inspecting mackerel 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackerel mostly 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters, which are more than three miles distant from the shore. Please state these facts in detail. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada? If so, to what extent, and What is the value? Sometimes the American fishermen take bait Within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada but to a very Small extent - - 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and Various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 7 If So, in What ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to bave the fishing-ves- Sels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing sea- Son? Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. They do purchase supplies in the ports of the DO- minion of Canada—American fishermen frequently land their cargo of mackerel and ship them to American ports—then they are obliged to get an entire outfit, and it is a great advantage to have the trade of the fishing-Vessels 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- Sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and Within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men 3012 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit " . g? 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it consist" 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before ; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate & They do not 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? A far greater benefit to the people of British North American Provinces than to the people of the United States 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States? 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market. Yes - 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. - 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them an- nually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the TJnited States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it.’ I solmnly sincerely & truly swear that the foregoing statements are true & correct to the best of my knowledge & belief. So help me God. * * O. B. WHITEN Sworn to hefore - M N RICEI Dep Collector No. 11. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO S B CHASE ON BEEIALF. OF THE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside? Stephen B Chase reside in Portland Main am 67 years old AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3013 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish? I have been in the buisness of re- ceiving and Delvering fish for the last twentyfive years 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. E G Willard George Trefetherin Henry Trefetherin John Conley Emery Cushing A G Sterling George F Lovett. 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- º articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so? I a Ve 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington 2 Cod Hake, Cusk Haddock Mackerel Herring Pogies are the principle 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- Sive? If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. The kinds are statied in my last an- SWer. . The value of Fish purchase including Cod Liver Oil and the Oil manufactured from Porgies is from $1800,000 to $2,000000. 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. Cannot give any answer to the first part of questions, the kinds of Fish caught on the coast of Maine which by the Treaty will be opened to the Cannadin Fisherman, 1st, Mackererll, which is large & valuable and may be maid so to the fishermen of the Provinces if they choose to make them SO, as they are taken earley in the season on our southern Cost and then Work east until Fall when they reach the English waters, this branch of the fishing interest is large and vauable to Maine Fisherman, and will be Open to Dominion fishermen 26 The Herring fishery is large and im- portant especially on the Eastern Coast 3d the pogie fishery is large and important, especscaly to Maine, and by the treaty this branch is trown Open to the Dominion Fishermen and will open to them a large and pro- fitable buisness to them if they choose to themselves of it also the Fresh Fish buisness will be thrown open to them in the Winter season affording emploument to men & vessels during the time they cannot be so em- ploye on their coast 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which aré to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? Cannot say - 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State 7 and if so, to what extent and value? A large amount of Baits is supplied to Canadien Fisherman cant say how much e 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction, than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? Cannot say 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries Cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fish- eries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what ex- tent annually 2 This will depend very much on the enterpris of the 3014. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Canadin Fisherman, as they will have a chance to competute for the win- ter fishing & earley mackerel Fishing 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them & Do not know 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries & More than three qaurters perhaps Nine tenths are out side 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in shore fisheries? Mackerel & Herring 15. If you state that the in-shore fisheries arepursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits & Should think one fourth part are taken within in shore limits 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore? Cannot say * 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? l think not 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-Vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone 3 Cannot Say 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken 2 How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Pogies, nearly all the Mackerel Bait is taken on the coast of Maine and within three miles of shore 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and man- ning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. As near as I can ascertain from enquirey think the expence will will be from $2000 to $3000, and usualy make three cruses a year - 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference between the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. Cannot tell 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coast of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries & I am with the Nova Scotia and New Brunswic 23. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & Cod and Pollock and salmon. - 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3015 of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. do not know 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada; if so, to what extent, and what is the value” they do sometimes but to small extent. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries; if So, in what ports, and to what extent? And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season 7 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage.—They do and will more largely when the treaty takes ef- fect, and will prove a valuable trade to the Province 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- Sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces (excluding Newfoundland) both without and Within the three-mile limit? If so, state how many vessels are so en- gaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, What is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the propor- tion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 2 I have no knowledge of the Number of Vessels employed or how many fish taken 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it consist? onley for a short time in the fall, and is mainly confined the per cent. of mackerel before stated 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate? Americans do not repack fish until they arrive home the other rights excepting transshipping cargo is of no value 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? I have no doubt of it and in conversation with both class of Fisherman the Do- minion Fishermen are better satisfied than our own with the Treaty according to there own statements .* 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? Cannot Say * 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the Only market. Yes. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please State them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Do not know 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada. On fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 301 6 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by Said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. I solmnly sincerely and truly swear that the foregoing statements are true & correct to the best of my knowledge & belief. So help me God. STEPEHEN B CELASE Sworn before me this 13th day of June 1873 M N RICH, Dep. Collector. No. 12. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO , ON BEEIALF OF THE UNITED STATES. I, Marshall N. Rich, make the following answers to the several ques- tions propounded to me, respecting the fisheries on behalf of the U. S.: 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 Marshall N Rich—reside in Portland Maine—am 42 years of age. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea fisheriee, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish " I have been Secretary of the Board of Trade of this city for the past ten years—published a commer- cial paper for seven years—in which capacities it has engaged much of my time in preparing & collating statistics and trade reports. I have also been Deputy Collector of Customs for this port for nearly five years, and am at this time, 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information 3 If so, please give some such name. W. S. Dana, E. G. Willard, George Trefethen, Emery Cushing, Geo. F. Lovett, John Conley & others. 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 I have examined Articles 18 and 22 inclusive of the “Treaty of Wash- ington.” g 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Cod, Pollock, Hake, Haddock, IMackerel, Herring, & “Porgies” (chiefly.) - 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive” If you can do this, please do so; and if not, please state where that information, can be procured. Of the kinds of fish previously enu- merated, including Cod-liver Oil. The value of that purchased in this market, is not much short of two and a half million dollars annually, of which, probably not one twentieth part are caught on that part of the Coast to be thrown open by the “Treaty.” I cannot state where the in- formation asked can be procured. AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 301 7 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington 3 Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. I cannot state with any practical degree of accuracy the amount and value of the American fisheries to be open to the Canadian fishermen through the provisions of the treaty. The kinds of fish that are caught On the Coast of Maine are Mackerel—which is one of the most valuable & Successful, especially early in the season before these fish frequent the Coast so far Eastward as the Canadian shores, and would afford a remunerative/business for the Canadian fishermen in supplying South- ern markets early in the season, before these fish reach the more Eastern shores of the British Provinces. The “Porgie” fishery of Maine is prob- ably the next in importance to that of Mackerel—and the most valuable of this class, of the whole Atlantic coast, as the yield of oil is much more abundant & better—than from any other source, this would open to the Canadian fisherman opportunities for an entirely new & remu- nerative business. The Herring fishery is also of considerable importance on the eastern shores of Maine. “Winter Cod fishing,” for supplying the markets with fresh fish affords a large business to American fishermen, for which Canadian fishermen could compete under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington. - 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington " I cannot answer. - 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State, and if so, to what extent and value? Canadian fishermen Obtain large supplies of bait in the markets of this State. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in be- ing able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and repack and Cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? This will depend largely to what extent the Canadian fishermen may avail themselves of the opportunities thus offered. - 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries CauSe any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fish- eries by our own fishermen ; and if so, in what manner, and to what ex- tent annually? The competition of Canadian fishermen will be likely to considerably reduce the profits of our own fishermen, especially in the winter fishing. # 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them 2 Can give no reliable informa- tion, 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic Coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries? Chiefly deep-sea fishing, but a small proportion are in-shore. fisheries. 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries? For mackerel chiefly. 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 3 I learn that probably not one quarter of the mackrel taken by 3018 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. American fishermen are caught within the in-shore limits, that more than three quarters are taken outside. 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore ? Yes—from the best information I have. 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? I have heard Canadian fishermen— Or Coasters say, that it was rather an advantage in the way of trade—to have American fishermen in their waters—than, otherwise—farther I Can- not Say. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large Quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone 2 I cannot Say—from personal knowledge, 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken º Eſow much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Porgies—principally taken within three miles of the shore. 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail, the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. Vessels of 60 to 70 tons costing 8 to 9 thousand dollars are the prevailing class of craft employed by the Maine fish- ermen and to “fit out " for a mackerel cruise—complete; costs from $2,500 to $3,000 per annum and they make three—sometimes four cruises a year, 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. I Cannot state the cost of fitting & manning Canadian fishermen—but think they must be very much less, as they are not so large & costly Vessels as those employed by American fishermen, f 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries 2 Only from such information as I have acquired in my busi- ness relations with the American fishermen & dealers and casual con- versation with Canadian Coasters, 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington 2 Mackerel—Pollock, & EIerring. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (Say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen ; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. I am not able to answer intelligably, 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3019 miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada? If so, to what extent, and what is the value 2 Eſave heard that they do occasionally. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 2 If So, in What ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season 3 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. Yes to some extent at Ealifax Yarmouth—Cape Breton & other places, and is an advantage to the ports of the Dominion. in furnishing supplies, &c, - 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- Sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, What is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, What is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the propor- tion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such Catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit " I cannot say how many U. S. vessels are yearly engaged or how many men employed—The kinds of fish caught is previously stated—the portion caught within 3 miles of the British coast is not over 10 per cent I think 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast ; whence is such profit derived, and in what does it con- sist 3 Perhaps ten per cent, as by such previledges, they can fish to bet- ter advantage near the shore for two months in the year. 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate & The fish caught by our fishermen are not repacked till they arrive home. Transhipping cargoes will be of some value. There Will be no other rights acquired by the treaty that I can now see. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? I should judge the “Treaty " to be as beneficial to the British North American Provinces, in every respect as to the people of the United States—Smoke- Houses will be established by American dealers at favorable ports of Shipment in the British Provinces to secure the advantages of cheaper labour. 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? Cannot answer, 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the Only market & Yes—so far as my knowledge goes, 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. I cannot tell, I ; 3020 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada. On fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872 inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. I Marshall N. Rich do solmnly—sincerely & truly swear that the fore- going statements are true & correct to the best of my knowledge & be- lif—So help me God MARSHALL N. RICH. Sworn before me this 12th day of June 1873 (Seal.) - D MORTLOR Dety Collr, Justice of the Peace No. 13. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHEREES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO ON BEEIALE OF THE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 Noah Swett—47—Wellfleet Massachusetts. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the Value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 7 Have been engaged in the mack- erel fishery 35 years. 15 years as catcher, 20 years as Inspector. Never have visited the Canadian waters. 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood Who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done So 2 Have examined the articles mentioned 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Cod, Mackerel, & Menha- den or Pogis are the Principal varieties of great value— 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coasts of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, in- clusive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. The Reports of the Inspector Gen- eral will give the total catch of Mackerel for those years but will include the foreign with the home catch, and it will be difficult I think to find a Separate statement of each. Am not aware that any public record of the catch of Cod on our shores has been kept. 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen, AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. * 3021 under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. Supposing that an annual average catch of Mackl—to be 250.000 bar- rels in all the New England States at $10 per barrel—the value would be —$2,500.000 for such fish alone, the value of the Cod & Porgy catch. I am not well acquainted with 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State % and if so, to what extent and value " I think the Canadian fishermen have not only in exceptional cases procurd Bait on Our coast. but have procured it from second hands. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington & The privilege to procure . bait is valuable. So is the liberty to repack and inspect their mackerel. The privilege relating to nets is not Worth much to either side. they salt their nets and do not dry - 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fish- eries by our own fishermen ; and, if so, in what manner and to what ex- tent annually? Our home fleet is already too numerous for the pros- perity of the business. If this Treaty causes the Canadian fishery largely to increase. the detriment to the Eſome vessel will be serious on acct of the difference in fitting. cost of vessel, &c enabling them to sell under 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them ż Am not aware that at present there are any to make acct of 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic. coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries? Very Largely deep sea fishery 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries & Mostly mackerel— 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 2 My opinion is from what I can learn from what ex-. perienced persons say that more than # of the catch has been outside the 3 mile limit in the Bay of St Lawrence. The American in shore fishery is very valuable, especially early & late. for mackerel and, fresh fishing fall. Winter & spring 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-Shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore ? Such are undoubtedly the facts 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters? I look upon it as a Very great ad- vantage to the Colonist 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- 3022 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large Quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone; It is often the case that while fishing in shore the Colonial fishermen ties on to the American, so as to take advantage of her bait. to toll mackerel along- side 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken º Eſow much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case, may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? The Porgy is the almost universal bait used, and is found from Long Island to the Penobscot River. and is all taken within the limits the annual value to one of our fishermen. is from $300 to $500 dollars 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home ports For the mackerel Fishery—an average vessel would cost, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $" as e e s = e s tº a tº ºr us e º an e $8000.00 Fitted With Barrels— . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 450.00 { % “ Salt. . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * 150.00 { % “ Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . & n e º a s as tº º 400.00 { % “ Bait - - - - . . . . . . . *As sº tº º ºx º e º ºs e º ºs e º ſº ºr sº tº dº gº dº º ºr ºf e - * * *s 300.00 46 “ 16 men—s . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ºn dº ſº tº sº e - - - - - - - - - - - - e s - - 3200.00 12.400.00 if she carries Seine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1200.00 13.600.00 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. The American mackerel fleet is a fleet of Yachts calculated for fleetness and composed and constructed of the best materials, The Canadian fleet is far below the other in material and construction, Many of the duties that the American pays are unknown to the Colonist Barrels. Salt and Provisions are likewise lower and of an inferior quality and the habits of living on board are very much in favor of the Colonist. I judge that the inhabitant of the Dominion can furnish and Sail his Schooner at # at least less cost than the American 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, which of these fisheries? Have no personal acquaintance, but have often sent vessels to those Waters. 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington 3 Mackerel & Cod— 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (Say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the Catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3023 from the shore; please state these facts in detail. For the ten pre- ceding years our fishermen from Cape Cod especially have not fre- Quented to any great extent the Bay of St. Lawrence for years not a vessel went there from this town (Wellfleet) Our shore fishery proving So much surer and productive than that of the Bay Since seining has become so popular Our hook fishermen are turning their attention that Way. to avoid cruising on the same ground with the seiners 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so. to what extent, and what is the value º Am not aware that they procur bait at all in the Canadian Waters 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and Various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 3 If So, in what ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is . it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing- vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing Season 2 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money- value of that advantage. The Ports in Gut of Canso. Georgetown. Charlottetown Malpec & Cascumpec are largely indebted to the Ameri- can fishermen for their custom. During the Reciprocity treaty these places flourished from the gains derived from that source. Since that treaty has been cancelled those same places have suffered severely from being unable to furnish supplies to American vessels tº 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- Sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 2 s 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it con- sist? Of course it will be a convenience to fish in shore. When we were denied that privilege fishermen kept more at sea, did not frequent the harbors so often and employed more time in business. deducting what they would catch off shore during the time used in shore, and amt of time Saved I think the privilege quite valueless. 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before ; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate º Am not aware that the American will gain any Valuable right in this way that they do not now possess. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are Concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? The fisher- j of the United States are a unit in deciding that the treaty is against them is 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat 3024 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the Only market. They do. Fat fish will not keep in warm countries. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equiv- alent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject Which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please State it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. I can only say that the universal opinion of those engaged in the American fisheries both at sea and on shore is that the terms of the treaty are decidedly against them, some have gone so far as to predict the total ruin of our own fisheries when brought into competition With the Dominion fisheries. For the last 25 or 30 years the Yan- kee has been training the Colonist his business, actually learning him his trade a large proportion of the fishermen of Nova Scotia are better acquainted on our shore than on their own. they have among them many capable men who have only to fit out their cheap vessels cheaply and enter the lists against their trainers and if this is carried to the extent that Yankee enterprise would carry it were the position re- Versed We may expect our business to decline and go into other hands, SO depressing an effect has this view upon the fisheries of this town that already this year we have sold 15 out of a fleet of 75 vessels and added Il OIl 62. |NOAH SWETT. Then personally appeared the above named Noah Swett and acknowl- edge the foregoing answers to be the best of his belief correct e EBENEZER. T. ATWOOD Justice of the Peace WELLFLEET June 17, 1873 No. 14. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO ON BEEIALE OF THE UNITED STATES. 1. Whāt is your name and age, and in what town and State do you re- side 3 Chas. C. Pettingill, Salem, Massachusetts 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted With the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish & Have been in the Fishing for 25 years past, most of the time in Gloucester 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. Chas A. Roper of Salem, Mass AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3025 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you examine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done So 2 I have examined said articles } 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Menhaden, a fish which is used principally for Mackerel Bait, and the Provinces depend mainly upon us for a supply. in my judgment it is quite a valuable considera- tion for them 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. this information will come to you correctly, no doubt. - 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. I think mainly, our advantage from the Treaty must come from the Mackerel Fishery. I have always regarded free fishing for mackerel in the Bay of St. Lawrence quite important to our fishing interest, other fisheries of no particular value to us, which comes from the Treaty, with free fishing in the Bay, which calls a large number of our vessels there give them a large amount of trade from our fleet, which they have al- ways regarded of much value to them. Add to that their fish free in our markets, with the advantage of our Mackerel Bait which comes to them freely, I am inclined to think nearly if not quite balances their claims against us, - 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? These facts are contained in Reports which I presume Will be available 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State 7 and if so, to what extent and value 2 largely their Mack- erel Bait comes for our coast. Value could not say 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington & Could not say 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fish- eries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually 7 Not very serious hinderance, 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them " - 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and What proportion of the in-shore fish- eries 2 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries 7 Mackerel chiefly. 15. If you state that the in-shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within 190 F - - 3026 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 2 I think a very small portion of the catch, the past fifteen years has been take within the limits. If our fishermen had felt secure and free to fish always when three miles from land, their catch from year to year would not have been much impaired. The trouble mainly has been, a fear to fish within sight of land, whenever any Cutters were in sight, knowing there was no redress when taken. here lies the great sacrifice which our fishermen have had to bear in the past. * 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally º on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore? €S. 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? I think it has worked for their ad- vantage rather than injury 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone 7 this is true 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken & How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? What we call Pogies, principally take on our coast, cannot state quantity & Value g 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. It cost about $2000. dollars to fit for a three month cod fish Trip, and $1500. dollars for a three months mackerel trip, this includes no wages or shares for the crew. 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. Shoulld think they could save in fitting for the business at least 25 per ct from our cost. -Provisions, salt, cost of vessels, and all labor when hired is much less than ours , t 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? 25 years - 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are. to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & Mackerel principally, other fish are little sought for in the limits 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3027 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the Waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada? If so, to what extent, and what is the value? Our Halibut Catcher often go in after fresh Bait, but always buy it, which is a good thing for them 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 7 If So, in what ports, and to what extent 3 And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-ves- sels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing sea- son 2 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. The amount of Supplies bought by our Fishermen during the year must be quite large, while we had free fishing there, think it would be safe to say that the American fleet paid at : P. Ed Island, Cansoe, Port Hood & Halifax 250,000 dollas per year for sup- plies of all kinds - 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing- Vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland), both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many ves- Sels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and What is the proportion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit? 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it con- Sist? A very small per centage of the fish will be caught within the limits, still I think free fishing will add much to the value of the catch 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washing- ton any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to re- pack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, What are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth an- nually, in the aggregate 2 I think none of any value. We have had no trouble in this respect of consequence 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? I have no doubt of it 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? Reports give these facts - ... " 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat her- ring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the Only market. this is mainly true 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 34. If you know, what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada On fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in 3028 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. I have no doubt that all the Provinces so far as the Fishing interest has to do With it, will thrive and prosper, much better under the free fishing, dureing the ten years of Resciprosituty or free fishing, they prospered much better than they have since, this is their own testimony, as I have heard it from very many of them, merchants as well as Fishermen themselves. - / CEHAS (). PETTINGILL & CUSTOM HOUSE, SALEM. Subscribed & sworn before me this twentieth day of June 1873. CHAS. H. ODELL Collector No. 15. & [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO ON BEEIALE OF TELE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside & William H. Nelson age 43. Plymouth Massachusetts 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 7 Have been engaged in the Cod- fishery since 1851 * 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give Some such name. 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 I have examined it. 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington 2 Mackerel Herrings & Men- haden principally - 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, in- clusive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. Mackerel fishery is carried on in Gloucester Provincetown Wellfleet Chatham Boston, Portland & other ports in Maine from which such information could be obtained 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. I Cannot. f 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3029 off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? Cannot state but Gloucester should be able to give this information. * 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State % and if so, to what extent and value " Bait is purchased & Sent to their ports. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington?—The Menhaden Bait which are used principally for mackerel fisherman are taken wholly in Mass. & Maine and are valuable, to what extent I cannot say. 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fish- eries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually ” They will necessarily diminish the catch of our fish- erman as a large fleet is more destructive to schools of mackerel than Smaller ones and any increase has that effect. 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them? I cannot say. 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic Coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- ries º Mackerel fisherman are the only in shore fisherman and the num- ber Gloucester could determine as I am not engaged in it. 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-Shore fisheries? Mackerel only. * 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 2 I cannot state from my own knowledge but only from the Statements made by the fishermen themselves some state it at about . . While others place the quantity much less and regard the inshore limit as of little or no value. 16. IS not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore? They are— * . 17. Are colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in colonial in-shore waters ? I should consider not 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- Shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large Quantities of bait are thrown out than when fishing alone Ž I think it is unquestionably so 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken 3 How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the Shore ? Menhaden are the princepal bait, and are caught usually in Bays & harbors. Vessels use from 20 to 60 Bs in season, and value is from 5 to $8 per Bl 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and man- ning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of 3030 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. Cost of fitting & furnishing vessels for codfishery exclusive of 1st cost of vessel & wages would be for one trip, about $25 per ton of vessel engaged in deep sea fisheries or Estimating catch as a full one about 2.00 per Ql currency, not including wages of men which would vary considerably. 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same Questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference between the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these re- spects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. I can- not state with any accuracy as to the cost of fitting vessels from Cana- dian ports, but it is much less on all articles of foreign importation used, as duties are much less On all such articles than in U. States The cost of their vessels is much less, not exceeding 3 of the cost of simi- lar class of vessels built here their salt cost them less also, which is Quite an item in curing of fish and Lumber, chains & anchors are also free of duty, costing not over # of prices of such articles here. 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Brince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of thes fisheries 7 I am not acquainted to any extent. * 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & Mackeril & Herrings only. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen ; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. I cannot. * 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada? If so, to what extent, and what is the value 3 Not that I am aware of. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 2 If so, in what ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-ves- sels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing sea- son? Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. Supplies are purchased to a considerable extent in all the Ports of Prince Edward Island, Cape Breton ; and Nova Scotia and the trade must be of considerable value The amount I am unable to State. * s 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit? If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 2 I cannot state With any AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3031 accuracy the number of vessels so engaged as the Gov't can easily determine that from C. House returns. Gloucester chiefly is engaged in What fisheries are prosecuted in those Waters and could furnish Such information. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it con- Sist? It is of no value to any but mackerel fisherman 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washing- ton any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate 2 The American fisheman consider themselves as sur- rendering more than they receive and gain no rights in drying and cur- ing fish which they did not possess before 30. IS not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are Concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? More so 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? I can- In Ot, State 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the father- ring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market. It does the only market 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United State on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. I cannot. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them an- nually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. I do not. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. As I have before stated the value of in shore fisheries accrues to the benefit of the mackerel fisherman only, as the Codfishery is a deep sea fishery and is cheifly pursued on the Banks of Newfoundland, and the treaty Which allows fish & oil from the Provinces to come in free of duty must Seriously interfere with the value of our own catch in our own mar- kets as we cannot with increased cost of outfits & vessels, compete Successfully with these fisherman. The mackerel fisheman feel that in opening our coast to their fisherman in procuring Bait and in supplying Our markets with fresh fish and mackerel, which on our coast are supe- rior in quality, is surrendering a greater value than any advantage which the treaty opens up to our fisherman in the Bay of s't Laurence. The Quantity of mackerel caught on our coast is much greater than that Caught on their coast and the price of mackerel of our coast catch will Command usually 25 % per cent. more than that caught in Bay of st Laurence. The Fresh fish trade which has increased rapidly the past few years and is now increasing by the opening up of Rail Communica- 3032 AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. tion is open to their fisheman by this treaty, and its value alone is in my opinion worth more to them than all the advantage we can receive back. The Codfishery interest here and in the vicinity would not were it in their power surrender our markets or open them free to their fishe- man for all the rights they confer coupled with the payment of $500,000 to them as a compensation under the reciprocity treaty the fisheries in the ports of Barrington & vicinity numbered some 50 vessels which found a market for their fish in our ports since that time their fisheries have declined in Barrington alone, to some 5 to 6 vessels only, and their fisherman are pursuing the business in vessels from here and vicinity. Some 12 entire crews coming from that section are employed in vessels here this present season, the present treaty Will encourage their fisheries and deprive us of men necessary to mall our vessels, which we obtain from Provinces. - - - Yours respectfully W. EI. NELSON COMMONWIEALTEI OF MASSAOEIUSETTS. COUNTY OF PLYMOUTH TOWN OF PILYMOUTH PLYMOUTH July 3, 1873. - Then William H. Nelson personally appeared and made oath that the statements by him made and signed, in the foregoing document, hereto annexed, are true according to his best knowledge & belief. Before me f - (Seal.) JNO. J. RUSSELL Notary Public within dº for said county--- No. 16. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO. ºp TO ON BEEIALE OF TEIE UNITED TATES. - 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside º Asa W. Small ; 33, Nantucket, Mass. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 2 I have been in the fishing business for twenty years. -- - 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, Rnown as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 I have examined the articles from 18 to 22. 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington? Cod, Mackerel, Haddock, Pollock, Hake, Porgee, Bluefish, Herring, Shad, Striped-Bass, Sea Bass & EHalibut. * y 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3033 annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fisher- men under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington? 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the Waters of your State? and if so, to what extent and value? They do not. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in be- ing able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and Cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries Cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen ; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually. - 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them 7 Not any at present. 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic Coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion Con- sist ºf the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- €I'10S 4 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in Shore fisheries 2 Cod, and Mackerel. 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within #. in shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore imits 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel gen- erally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within Shore ? The larger quantity are taken off shore. - 17. Are colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters? I should say not. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- Shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone * Yes, That has been my experience. 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it princi- pally taken 3 How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Provinces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the Shore ? Porgee & Menhaden, principally taken from Long Island, NY. to the coast of Maine. 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go 3034 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of return- ing to the home port. - 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries 7 I am acquainted with the fisheries of Nova Scotia and Prince Edwards' Island. t 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Cod and Mackerel. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (Say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the Waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value & They do not. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries? If so, in what ports, and to what extent? And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing Ves- sels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season & Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing- vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and What is the proportion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 3 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it con- sist Very little — or none . 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washing- ton any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to re- pack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, What are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth an- nually, in the aggregate? They do not gain anything, as they do not in these days cure fish or repack, but return home as soon as they get their fares - 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are Concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? I AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3035 should say that the people of the British North American Provinces had the best of us, by far— 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States? 32. For all No. 1 and.No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market & It does. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. . 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. ASA W SMALL NANTUCKET, ss. June 10th, 1873. Then personally appeared the above named Asa W. Small and made oath to the truth of the foregoing statements by him signed, before me. - T. C. DEFRIEZ Collector of Customs. No. 17. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISEIERIES TO BE PRO. POUNIDED TO ON BEEIALE OF THE UNITED STATES. s 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 3 - Charles E. Smalley, aged 40, \ IReuben C. Kenney aged 56, § t 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 3 Have followed the fishing business at Sea for fifteen years. - 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If S0, please give some such name. 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 We have examined and read articles 18 to 22. inclusive. - 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Cod, Mackerel, Halibut, Had- dock, Herring, and Porgies. - 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken Nantucket, Mass. 3036 AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclusive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state Where that information can be procured. - 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fisher- men under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State, and if so, to what extent and value & Canadian fishermen do not purchase bait or Supplies in our State, to any extent. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other re- striction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington? The Value is nothing in our estimation. -> - 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisher- ies cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually? They will in this way; They can man their Vessels with less expense, consequently they can undersell us, and by bringing their fish to our market they will do so, as there are no duties on them, and the result will be, our markets will soon be glutted, and fish very low. * . . 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them " We do not know of any Canadian Boats or Vessels engaged in the fisheries, in this State. - 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries? In our estimation, Two Thirds consists of Deep sea fisheries, and One third of Inshore fisheries. 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries? Mackerel, Cod, and Porgies, chiefly Mackerel. 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits? More than two thirds of the Mackerel are taken outside of the inshore limits, in our opinion.— 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and not within shore ? We should say, The greater portion of Mackerel taken off the coasts of British America, would be outside the in shore limits, and in the Sum- mer Season, Mackerel are generally found wide out on the Banks. 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters? We should say they are not injured, but benefitted in a measure. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3037 quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone? Should think the Colonial fishermen would be the gainers in the end by having the mackerel baited up for them. 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken º How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British ProV- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? The Porgie is considered the best bait for the Mackerel, is taken all along the Shores & Rivers, Long Island Sound, Connecticut River, Pleasant Bay, Boston Bay, off Portsmouth, Portland, and all along the Eastern Shore. 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and man- ning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. For a Vessel of Seventy tons, manned by 10 men for a trip of 3 months to the Banks for Cod Fish Vessel.---------------------------------------------------------------- $700.00 Provisions $500. Salt $350 -------------------------------------------- 850. 00 Bait $290. Dories $200 ------------------------------------------------ 490. 00 Fish lines—Leads $50. Sundries $100.---------------------------------- J50, 00 Mens Wages.-----> ------------------------------------------ - - - - - - - - - - - 1,700.00 Total ---------------------------------------------------------- $3,890.00. 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in What capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? $ - 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value? They do procure bait within 3 miles of the above Coast. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries " If so, in what ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing- vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season 2 Explain Why it is so, and estimate if you can, the money- value of that advantage. American fishermen do purchase Supplies such as Salt, Bait, Ice, Barrels, and provisions &c in the Ports of the dominion of Canada. 3038 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing- vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the Brit- ish North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit? If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit” 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived ; and in what does it con- Sist º 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before ; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate 7 Do not consider it is any advantage to American fishermen, to dry nets or cure fish in any way, as by so doing, they in- jure themselves by the detention of getting their cargoes to market. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? More ben- eficial to the people of the Provinces than to the people of the Uuited States. 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market. It does. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the Uni. ted States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said treaty, please state them an- nually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Dritain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. CHARLES. E. SMALLEY, REUBEN C FCENNEY NANTUCKET, ss. June 9th, 1873. Then personally appeared the above named Charles E. Smalley, and Reuben C. Kenney and made oath to the truth of the statements above signed by them—before me T. C. DEFRIEZ. Collector of Customs. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3039 No. 18. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISEIERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO ON BEEIALE OF THE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 7 Elisha Crowell; Brooklyn. New-York. 59 Years 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish? Twenty five years experience in Catching, buying and selling fish - 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. Caleb Nickerson, Esq. Brooklyn. New York. # 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- º articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 I àV6, 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington 2 Mackerel. Herring. Codfish. Haddock. Hake. Bass. Shad. Porgies. Menhadden. Spanish Macker Eels Lobsters. Bluefish. Sword & Week fish 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- Sive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. Mackerel 75,000 Barrels. Menhaden. 500,000 Bbls. Codfish 70.000 Quintals. Haddock. 15,000 Bbls. Bluefish 75,000 Bbls. All other kind 300,000 Lobsters. 10,000 Bbls. Annually. Porgies. 50,000 Bbls. 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. I estimate from waters in and adjacent to this state (NY.) about Nine (9) Million dollars in Mackerel alone. All other Kinds of Fish about Ten (10) Million dollars. 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington? " Have no estimate. 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State 2 and if so, to what extent and value * Do not take bait from our waters, but purchase from the United States. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in be. ing able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and Cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington? About an equal Value, except the priviledge of procuring bait from the United States. 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisher- 3040 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. ies cause any detriment r hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually " It will probably be a detriment to our Markets to the amount of TWOhundred Millions. * 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them 7 None. 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- series? fully Nine tenths (1%) consist of deep sea fisheries; about one tenth (*) in shore fisheries l - 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in- shore fisheries? Mackerel & Herring 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 3 Nine tenths off shore. (Hºr.) One tenth in shore. (T's 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore ? Yes, a very large proportion caught outside, say tº 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? No. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone 2 Yes. 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken & How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Menhaden taken from American waters all in shore. Fifty Thousand dollars benefit to the British Provinces, annually— 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. Menhaden, Mackerel, Codfish, Herring, Bluefish, Lobsters, Por- gies, Haddock Hake, Halibut, Swordfish & Weekfish Cost of Shooner. :" Fitting, equipping & furnishing for a cruise of thirty days, $3,00 - 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference between the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. Estimated expense of Canadian Vessels one half of the same class of vessel built in the United States, on account of the inferior Materials & Workmanship also cheapness of Labor - 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Que- bec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3041 of these fisheries? I am—for Twenty five years—having fished on their Coasts for codfish & mackerel. 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackerel, Herring, & Lobsters. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen ; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. No answer. See Question, 27. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value * Do not procure any bait, not plenty in Cana- dian waters. * * - 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 3 If so, in what ports, and to what extent? And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing- vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season & Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money- value of that advantage. They do at Halifax and in the ports of the straits of Canso & Prince Edward Islands. And it is a great advantage to the Dominion ports to have American vessels on account of trade & trafic, - 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-Ves- sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so en- gaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 2 About one hundred and fifty sail of Schooners. Valued at one Million five hundred thousand dol- lars; Employing Fifteen hundred men—catching Mackerel and codfish valued at seven hundred thousand dollars, one tenth (la) within three miles and nine tenths (ºr) outside the three mile limit 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a Voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it consist Ž About one tenth (13) when the fish lay in shore and cannot be taken off Shore. w 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of, Washing- ton any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to re- pack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth an- nually, in the aggregate % I do not consider it of any value to American fishermen - 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American provinces as to the people of the United States ? It is more benefit to the Provinces, than the United states. 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all 191 F. 3042 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? Refer to statistics. - 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the Only market. Yes, it is the only market 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the TJnited States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872 inclusive. Refer to Statistics in possession of the government. } 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. I do not know of any fish or fish oil being shipped to Canada. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. . I consider the Treaty of more value to the British Provinces than to the United States for the following reasons; First—for the priviledge of fishing on the coast of the United States. Second.—the marketing and shipping their fish free. Third—the furnishing our fishing vessels with Supplies. - * ELISELA CROWELL CITY AND COUNTY OF NEW YORK Elisha Crowell, merchant of the City of New York, being duly sworn, deposes and says, that the answers made by him to the several inter- rogatories as above, have been duly considered by him, and that the same are based on his knowledge and experience of the fisheries, and that the subject matter therein contained is true to his best knowledge and belief So far as the same can be ascertained. . tº ELISEIA. CROWELL Sworn before me This 18 day of June 1873 A. M. SARES (Seal.) Notary Public. STATE OF NEW YORK }s S No. 19. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO * ON BEEIALE OF THE UNITED STATES. - 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside" Caleb Nickerson, 48 years, Brooklyn, New York, 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 7 Twenty years experience in catch- ing, buying and Selling fish. 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood \, AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3043 who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. Elisha Crowell Esq. Brooklyn, New York, 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 I have 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & Mackerel, Herring, Codfish, Haddock, Hake, Bass, Shad, Porgies, Menhaden, Spanish Mackerel, Eels, Lobsters, Blue fish, Sword and Week fish. 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, in- clusive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. Mackerel, 75,000 Barrels Menhaden 500,000 Bbls Codfish, 70,000 Quintals all other kinds 300,000 “ Blue fish, 75,000 Bbls * Lobsters, 10,000 “ Annually. Porgies, 50,000 “ (The above estimate includes both fresh Haddock, 15,000 “ & salt fish) 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. About Seven Million dollars in Mackerel alone. All other kinds of fish, one hundred and Twenty five Million dollars. 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State 2 and if so, to what extent and value * Do not take bait from the waters, but purchase from the United States; but can avail them- Selves of this privilege under the treaty. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in be- ing able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? About an equal value, except the privilege of procuring bait from the United States. 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually ” It will. Probably a detriment to our markets to the amount of Two Hundred Millions. * 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them 7 None 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries 2 fully nine tenths (1%) consist of deep sea fisheries, about one tenth (†) inshore fisheries 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in- shore fisheries? Mackerel & Herring 3044 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 3 Nine tenths (1%) offshore. One tenth (ſº) on shore. 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen on the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and not within shore ? Yes. A very large proportion caught outside - 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? No. - - 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large Quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone 2 Yes. 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where it is principally taken 7 How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Menhaden—taken from American waters—all in shore. Fifty thousand dollars benefit to the British provinces. - 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. Menhaden, Mackerel, Codfish, Herring, Blue fish, Lobsters, Porgies, Haddock, Hake, Halibut, Sword & Week fish. Cost of Schooner $12,000 Fitting, equipping, & furnishing for a cruise of Thirty days, or more $6,000 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. Es- timated expense of Canadian Vessel, one half of the same kind or class of Vessel built in the United States. On account of the inferior mate- rials and Workmanship, also cheapness of labor. 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? I am, for Twenty years having fished on their Coasts for Codfish & Mackerel. 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Codfish, Mackerel, EIerring, Lobster. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. Uncertain as to cor- rect figures. Question 27 seems to embrace some of the information Sought. * 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3045 and what is the value * Do not procure any bait. The kind used are not found in sufficient numbers in Canadian Waters. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 2 If so, in what ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is it pot an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-Ves- Sels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing sea- Son & Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. They do at Halifax, and in the ports of the Straits of Canso and Prince Edwards Island, and it is a great advantage to the Pºion ports to have American Vessels, on account of trade and traffic. - 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-Ves- Sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, What is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of Such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 2 About One hundred and fifty sail of Schooners. Valued at one million five hundred thous- and dollars; Employing Fiteen hundred men, Catching Mackerel and Codfish, valued at seven hundred thousand dollars, one tenth (†) within three miles limit, and nine-tenths (ſº) out side the three mile limits. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it consist 3 About one tenth (tº) when the fish lay in shore and cannot be taken off Shore. 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate 2 I do not consider it of any value to American fish- £I’Iſla,L]. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? It is more benefit to the Provinces than to the United States. 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually, shipped to the United States ? I estimate. 100,000 Barrels Mackerel valued at ---------------------- $1,000000 50,000 £ 6 Herring “ “ ---------------------- 500,000 75,000 Quintals Codfish “ “ ---------------------- 300,000 50,000 & 4 Hake & Haddock “ “ ---------------------- 100,000 10,000 Bbls. fish oil “ “ ---------------------- 160,000 7 to 100,000 “ Alewives at $4% per Bbl. Say --------------------------- 300,000 All other kinds of fish----------------------------------------------------- 50,000 Total.------------------------------------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $2,410,000 º-º-º-º-mº 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the father- ring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market. Yes, it is the only market. 3046 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. The Statis- tical department of the Government can, perhaps, answer this. I can only estimate based on answer to question 31, to wit: Say on Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200,000 Cod. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,000 Herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ---------- 50,000 Haddock - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20, 000 Fish oil - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 32,000 Aggregate. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 362,000 *º 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872 inclusive. I do not know of any fish or fish oil being shipped to Canada. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. I consider the treaty of more value to the British Provinces than to the United States, for the following reasons. . 1st for the privilege of fishing on the Coast of the U. S. 2d the marketing and shipping their fish free. 3d the furnishing of our fishing vessels with supplies. STATE OF NEW YORK }ss CITY & County OF NEW YORK, ſº Caleb Nickerson of the City of New York being duly sworn deposes and says, That the answers made by him to the several interrogatories as above, have been duly considered by him, and that the same are based on his knowledge and experience of the subject of the fisheries, and that he believes, the same to be true so far as can be ascertained without official statistical figures. - CALEB NICKERSON. Sworn before me This 13 day of June 1873. (seal.) I B GREGG Notary Public. - NO. 20. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO- BOUNDED TO ON BEEIALE OF THE UNITED STATES. - - - - 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 Horatio Babson; thirty six; Gloucester, Mass. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3047 the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the Value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 7 Have had sixteen years experience in the fishing business Now own eleven vessels. 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. John Pew & hundreds of others if required. 4. A copy of the treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 3 I have. - 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington? Mackerel, Halibut Codfish, Pollock, Eſake, Menhaden, and many other kinds. * 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the yeass 1854 to 1872, inclusive? If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that in- formation can be procured. Would refer to the Genl Inspector's report of the annual catch of mackerel. One hundred (120,000) and twenty thousand bbls annually I should judge to be about an average catch taken off our own coast most of which are caught inside of three miles from the Coast. # 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. The Mackeral fishery on our coast I consider more valuable than that on the British coast. As the quality of mackeral taken on our éoast is far superior to those taken on the coast of Nova Scotia and Bay of St. LaW- rence. The Menhaden fishery, the catch of which amounted to nearly eight hundred thousand dollars off Gloucester last year are caught only upon our coast, and have never been known to frequent British waters. The Cod and other fisheries I regard as equal in value 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts, which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington 3 The quantity and value taken by Canadian fishermen is of more value to them, than to our fishermen, as our American vessels seldom catch anything but mackeral within the three-mile limit. 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State 2 and if so, to what extent and value 2 I have known but two or three instances of Canadian vessels taking bait within three miles On Our Coast, but they do purchase Menhaden for bait in large quantities. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other re- striction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? The value to be derived there from is of equal value to Canadians as it is to our- Selves, should they improve the privilege as we do te 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fish- eries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen ; and if so, in what manner, and to What extent annually ” American fishermen can supply our markets, and all fish caught by foreigners will have a tendency to injure our fish- ©I’Iſle Il 3048 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them " I know of none at this present time { 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion Con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries 2 My opinion judging from the catch of our own vessels that seven eighths of the catch is taken out side of the three mile limit 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in shore fisheries? For Mackeral principally, and occasionally Herring 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits.” During the last sixteen years I have had vessels en- gaged in the Bay of Chalieur & Bay of St Lawrence, and during that time I have questioned our Captains very particularly on this question and I think I can truly say that about one eighth part of the mackeral are taken within three miles of the shore and seven eighths outside of the limits * 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the inshore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore ? A large porportion, in fact about all the mackeral our vessels catch are taken outside the limits, late in the Fall the mackeral tend in shore. 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial inshore waters? Only to a very limited extent. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone º The larger quantity of bait thrown the more it tends to toll the Mackeral, hence fhe catch will be larger. 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it princi- pally taken 2 How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Brovinces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore? Pogies, sometimes called Menhaden are the best bait for Mackeral. They are caught only upon the New England Coast and tend inside of three miles. The value of Menhaden taken in 1873 amounted to nearly ($800,000.00) Eight hundred thousand dollars. 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and man- ning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. The vessels are sailed on shares, crew receive on half of proceeds. Average expense of a vessel for a five months cruise thirty five hundred dollars for out fits Expenses of 12 men five months three thousand dollars making in all about sixty-five hundred dollars for the voyage. - 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3049 tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. Our American fishermen cost about twice as much as the Canadian vessels, Our Vessels being better built from the best of white oak, and fitted with the best of rigging, sails &c., while the Canadian, Prince Edward Isl. and, and Nova Scotia vessels are built from soft wood (spruce) and are rigged and fitted in a very inferior manner compared with our vessels. The cost of outfits for a Canadian fishing vessel to pursue a five months Voyage would not be over one half of one of our American fishermen, allowing the vessels to be of equal size 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? With all the sea fisheries on the coast 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackeral, Herring, Halibut, Cod, Hake, Pol- lock and some others of less importance. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen ; also the amount and the annual value of the Catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. I estimate the an- nual value during the above years at about sixty thousand dollars per year for the fisheries inside of three miles. Outside of the three miles the value is of greater importance and depends all together on the en- ergy which is made to catch the fish, The more vessels and men im- ployed the greater the value. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value º Our vessels purchase large quantities of Her- ring & Mackeral for Bank fishing. I should judge we paid them one hundred and seventy thousand dollars annually in cash. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and Various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries & If So, in what ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is it Inot an advantage to the ports of the lyominion to have the fishing- vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing Season & Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money- Value of that advantage. I should judge the profits to be derived from the business which the Canadians receive from our vessels in purchasing Supplys from them to be equal to one hundred thousand dollars annually. . 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- Sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and Within the three-mile limit. " . If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of Such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 2 I should judge about Seven hundred and fifty sail, valued as near as I can judge at ($7,500,000.) seven million five hundred thousand. Each vessel will average twelve men. Principal fish caught are Mackeral, Cod, Halibut, 3050 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. and Herring. Annual value of fish caught, one and three-quarter mil- lion dollars. Value of fish taken inside of three miles about sixty thou- Sand dollars. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast ; whence is such profit derived ; and in what does it con- sist Ž I do not regard it of any value as far as profit is concerned. The only benefit to be derived is freedom of Ports and free from annoyance. 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack , them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate & The value of the above privileg's I regard as of very little importance. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? Far more beneficial to British subjects. 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States? I do not know the amount. g - 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the greater part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon does not the United States afford the only market. It does nearly all. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. I do not know the amount, but would refer to statistics -> * 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada. On fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. I do not know. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Dritain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. My opinion is that England will derive more benefit from the treaty of Washington than the United States, and it is the opinion of nearly all who are engaged in the fishing business, that we have already granted more privileges to the subjects of Great Britain under the treaty than we shall receive. The admission of British fish into our markets free of duty is a serious blow to the fishing interests of the United States. Our fishermen cah supply our markets from the catch on our own coast and the deep-sea fisheries. Since the abrogation of the reciprocity treaty I have kept about one half of my vessels employed off our coast, and in every instance they have landed more fish and stocked more money than those that have been employed in the Bay of St Lawrence. When the Dominion Government authorized a system of licensing American fishermen for which they charged fifty cents per ton for the privilege of fishing within the three-mile limit, freedom of their ports &c.—Our Captains during the first year took licenses (part of them) and the benefit they derived from it they did not consider equal to the amount paid, and the next AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3051 year when they went to the Bay the Dominion Government charged one dollar per ton for license. Our Captains declined taking licenses considering the price too much for the benefit to be derived - - EIORATIO BABSON GLOUCESTER June 21st 1873 Personally appeared H. Babson and acknowledged the above to be his free act and deed and that these statements are true to the best of his knowledge and belief. Before me r AARON PARSONS J P, I Charles P. Mitchell, Captain of the American fishing schooner Mo- dena B. Jeraulds have been engaged in fishing in the Bay of St Law- rence ºuring the last fifteen years, Have read the questions and answers herein annexed and I fully concur in them all. - CHARLES P. MITCHELL GLOUCESTER June 21st 1873 * I George W. Lane, Captain of the American fishing schooner Adelia B. Hartwell have been engaged in fishing in the Bay of St Lawrence Guring the last fifteen years, Have read the questions and answers herein annexed and I fully concur in them all. GEORGE W. LANE. GLOUCESTER June 21st 1873 No. 21. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING TEIE FISEIERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO ON BEEIALE OF THE UNITED STATES. *- 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 7 Frank. W. Friend Gloucester, Mass 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish? Have been engaged in the Fishing business as Owner and Fitter several years. 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? . If so, please give some such name. Perkins Bros. Charles Parkhurst W. H. Friend & others. - 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so º I have examined articles 18 to 22 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the ºvisions of the Treaty of Washington? Mackerel Herring Pogies C— - 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive # If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. 3052 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them ; ºtal showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each IIl Cl. f 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington 2 Must be obtained from Statistics 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State % and if so, to what extent and value? All their Pogie Bait is obtained from the U. S. - 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually * Nothing except cheaper vessels and more competi- tlOn 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them 2 Uncertain ! 13..Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- º Nearly all the Fishing untill September is off shore deep Sea Sning 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries? Mackerel principally 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly Or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits * Think # of the Mackerel caught before the 15th of Sept are caught outside the three-mile limit 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore ? They are, Bank Bradly & Orphan being the best fishing grounds—in the summer season of Magdalen Island some Mackerel are caught 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permittting American fisher- men to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? No In good seasons they are much benefitted by American vessels fishing In their Waters 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone 2 Yes 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken & How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Pro- Vinces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Porgies, mostly taken on the shores of Massachusetts & Maine 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3053 \\ a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. Pogie Fishing requires a crew of 10 men at a cost of about 300 a month. Mackerel Fishing about the same exclusive of crews Wages, Bank Fishing $400 a month this includes Barrels salt costs of fitting Insurance &c.— .. 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. Don’t know the expense of fitting Canadian vessels but should judge from what I have seen of their Vessels & fittings that they could be run for one half of What American Vessels could - ! Sch Finance for the season of 1872– *. Fished on Georges from Feb. 1 to July 15, then went to the Bay of St. Lawrence and stopped untill Sept. 20 and then followed Georges Fishing untill Nov. 15— Cost of Stores x 1200 CoSt “Salt 500 CoSt “ Barrels 240 Cost of Running the Wessel sails rigging &c.— 900 Insurance— 350 Bait 800 *} 3990 Crew Share 3900 $7890. 00 Value of 260-000 W Codfish 5800 ** ** 220 Bll Mackerel 2400 ſº $8200, 00 This was more than an average Season work—' 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Brince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries º Am well acquainted with them. 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackerel mostly. Halibut & Cod fish in Small quantities. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen ; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore ; please state these facts in detail. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada? If so, to what extent; and what is the value 3 As a general thing, the American fishermen buy their bait of the Canadians. * 29. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 2 If So, in what ports, and to what extent; and, if that is the case, is it not 3054 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. an advantage to the ports of the dominion to have the fishing-ves- sels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season ; explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. Yes; during the Reciprocity Treaty nearly the whole American Fleet refitted in Canso & Charlottetown. In some cases their Outfitts amounting to $1,500. I should think the Mackerel Fleet would average $600. sº 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing- vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both with- out and within the three-mile limit? . If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the proportion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit. About 660 Wessels are annually engaged they average about 60 tons worth $60 priſon $2,350,- 000 employing 8,000 men. * 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profits derived; and in what does it con- sist Ž In case we are deprived of Fishing at the mouths of the rivers. the Fishey would be entirely valueless— 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before ; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate % No, the Canadians are more benefitted than We are 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States? It is more benefit to the Canadians than to the American Fisherman - 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States? See report of U. S. Statistics * 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market. No Fat Mackerel & Hering are shipped anywhere ex- cept the U. S. - - e - 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the Uni- ted States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them, annually and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. See Report from Beaureou of Statistics - 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them an- nually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. The amount of remission of Duties on Canadian Fish and the free market of the U. S.– for their Mackerel, & other Fish, Saving of Expenses of Cutters, And the benefits of a large trade from the American Wessels, the admission to our coasts for Menhaden & Mackerel, will aggregate an advantage of nearly $2,000,000 a year in gross amount—For this we obtain the privilege of persuing a fishery, which after deducting expenses will not nett to the American Fisherman $10,000 pryear— AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3055 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. What we desire most by the treaty of Washington is to have accorded to American Fishing Vessels, the same rights & privileges that have ever been accorded to English Vessels in American Waters. If this courtesy is to be reckoned at the money value the Dominion may have Some claim, but if the in shore fishery is the only concession, barring us the right to fish at the mouths of the rivers, the U. States gets abso- lutely nothing for the privilege of building up a Foreign fishery at the expense of its own citizens. FRANK. W. FRIEND SIDNEY FRIEND Of the firm of Sidney Friend & Bro STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS COUNTY OF ESSEX S Subscribed and sworn to, - Before me * (Seal) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public. | SS. GLOUCESTER June 21st 1873 NO. 22. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO- POUNDED TO ON BEBALF OF THE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 George W. Plumer; Aged 55 yrs; Gloucester Massachusetts 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish” Have been familiar with the busi- ness for more than thirty years, and engaged in Mackerel—Herring and other fisheries fifteen years in American waters, also at Newfoundland, Gulf of St Lawrence. P. E. Island &c. &c. * 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhoo Who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information? If So, please give some such name. Andrew Leighton and hundreds of others if required * \ t 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so. 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Codfish. Halibut. Mackerel. Pohagan. Herring and Pollock are most valuable. but many other kinds Could be mentioned * 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- Sive 3 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where 3056 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. that information can be procured. The kinds are those above named, but the quantity and value is so enormous that a long time would be required to ascertain from Statistics the actual fact, or a correct esti- mate 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fisher- men under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. British vessels have had no occasion formerly to take fish in American Waters excepting to a limited extent. but under the Treaty of Washington they will have every facility that American fish- ermen have now or formerly enjoyed. and our markets being free will afford them a decided advantage over us from the fact of vessels being cheaper built and sailed than ours. I doubt if they ever improve these opportunities to any great extent. but if they choose to do so could employ one thousand Sail of Vessels in American fisheries, as well as Citizens of the United States g - 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington & the quantity taken by Canadian and other British fishermen is very large and of great value to them. but to Americans of little value comparatively from the fact that the British takes mostly Codfish and Herring—while Americans seldom fish for Cod within three miles of land and only have occasion to take Mackerel and Herrings Within the limits of three miles 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State % and if so, to what extent and value? I have never known but one British vessel to take bait in the Waters of Massachusetts, but they do purchase Pohagan bait salted in considerable quantities 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the Coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? This depends entirely on their improving these advantages as before stated. the privilege is as valuable to them as to us, if they make the best of it 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderallce to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually 3 American fishermen can supply the Markets of the TJnited States with all fish caught in our waters. so that all landed by foreigners are so much taken from our own fishermen 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your States, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them 7 None at this time June 1873 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries 2 I am of the opinion that more than nine tenths (1%) of all fish caught by Americans in British waters are deep sea fish. or taken more than three miles from land. 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries? If at all only for Mackerel and Herring 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the: AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3057 in-shore limits 7 In answering this question I would state that having made enquiry of several competent Masters of vessels engaged many years in Mackerel fishing in British waters, they all inform me that Only a very few times in many years have they ever seen an opportunity to fish within three miles of the shore, the difficulty has been they were not allowed to fish outside the three miles limit. being captured or an- noyed by British Cruisers when five or six miles from land. The question constantly arising of limitation. and in my judgment the same trouble may come under the new Treaty of determining the Mouths of Rivers, as Mackerel frequent the entrance of creeks and Rivers to obtain feed 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore ? A large proportion are off shore, but late in Summer and Autumn they frequent the mouths of Rivers and in shore for feed 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? Only to a very limited extent 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing vessels, from which large Quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone º The more Bait thrown, and the better the quality the more Mackerel are taken, and Canadians would have the advantage, our vessels using more bait 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken 7 How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Provin- ces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Pohagan called “Pogies” make the best bait for Mackerel—and are caught on the New England Coast only—and usually within three Miles of shore. my estimate of the value is ($750,000) three-fourths of a mil- lion dollars. & - 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State Or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing and manning a Vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the Cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. The vessels are usually sailed on Shares, the men receiving one- half the proceeds of Sales of fish, but I should estimate the expenses and earnings of crews would average for phe Mackerel Season of about fiv months, three thousand dollars ($3,000) to each vessel - 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. Eſaving been engaged in the fishing business at P. E. Island I should estimate the expense there at two-thirds (3) for each vessel of that of our vessels, for the reason that the vessels are built cheaper, the men are fed poorer and of course at a lower rate there rate of duties on im- ported Articles are less, 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coast of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries 2 In the Capacity of Owner for about fifteen years in Mackerel 192 F. . 30.58 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. and Herring mostly. at Gulf of St Lawrence Newfoundland. Bay of Fundy and particularly P. E. Island 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackerel, Herrings. Cod, Halibut, Pollock, Haddock Hake and some other varieties 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. - 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value & They do obtain bait, and I estimate the value at two hundred thousand dollars $200,000 which is paid in Cash to British fishermen. - 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries? . If So, in what ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-vessels of the United States in their neighborhnod during the fishing season 3 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. Money value of this trade $500,000 Half Million They do obtain supplies at all accessible British Ports. Say at all places in Bay of Fundy Halifax and other ports in Nova Scotia, Straits of Canso, Sydney in Cape Breton Charlottetown and Georgetown and others in F. E. Island Bay Chaleur—and many other smaller places 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic Coast of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so en- gaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit. " I estimate the number of Vessels so employed at Seven hundred, value at $3,000000 three millions Seven thousand men. fish taken are Cod, Mackerel, Halibut, Hake—Berrings Haddock—Pollock. &c. &c. Value of fish one and one half Million dollars and the amount taken within three miles of land at fifty thousand dollars 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it consist & Not over five per cent., and that from occasionally catching Mackerel, and a small amount derived from taking Herrings 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washing- £on any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to re- pack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth an- mually, in the aggregate 2 the value of drying Nets and making fish are very small, and the right to land fish in transit we have always had, sor it has usually been done - AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3059 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are Concerned, more, or quite as beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States? more beneficial to British Subjects as all fat Mackerel and Herrings, and most other kinds of fat fish, are and must be marketed in the United States, as they will not bear heat to West Indies 31. What is the amount and value of Colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States? Amount unknown, but will be very largely increased with a free Market 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the Only market. Fat fish cannot be sent into hot climate as they melt and become worthless, consequently the U. States consumes nearly all of that description 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Am Inot in possession of the Statistics to show a correct answer to this ques- tion, but do know that they will be largely increased provided the Can- adians and other British Subjects improve their oppurtunities, and in this connection I would say that the Canadian fisheries are controlled to a great extent by Merchants of Wealth from the Island of Jersey, they having very extensive establishments. and with all facilities at Command hire their Men and feed them as common Sailors.--thereby greatly reducing the Cost of Catching fish, while American fishermen earn more than double, and are fed and clothed better than the for- eigners, showing that if so disposed British Subjects can supply the United States with fish cheaper than we can do it ourselves 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada On fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Unknown. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equiv- alent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this sub- ject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in re- Spect of it. For reasons already given, and Many others that could be advanced. my opinion is that Great Britain has the best of the Treaty already. without any other Condition being granted, º And feeling at liberty to express myself fully under this head, must Say that in my judgement and in that of others engaged in the fish- eries here, a mistake of great importance has been made in excluding us from the Mouths of Rivers as Mackerel which are our most valuable fish frequent those waters where their natural feed is found and this is frequently the case at points where the fresh and sea waters meet at the Rivers Mouth. and this question or line should be clearly defined. as otherwise the same trouble may arise in drawing the line, as grew out Of the three mile,Question º: - G. W. PLUMER GLOUCESTER Mass June 1873 3060 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. ESSEX SS. - Personally appeared the said Geo W. Plumer and made oath that these statements are true to the best of his knowledge and belief, Before me. . • \ MAss } JULY 21, 1873 AARON PARSONS, J. P. No. 23. -> [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO --—— ON BEEI.A.L.F. OF TEHE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 Harvey Knowlton & Edward A. Horton Gloucester Mass. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 7 Have been personally engaged as practical Fishermen twenty two years, Fitted and owned vessels seven years We now fit out eight vessels 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. * 4. A copy of the treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you examine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 We have. $ § - 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackerel Codfish Pol- lock Menhaden - 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. The reports of the Inspector Gen of Fish for the State of Massachusetts comprises the most accurate state- ments. Think about 200,000 Bbls of Mackerel per year is a fair average for Mass vessels - e 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fisher- men under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. We consider the Mackerel fishery on our own coast as valuable as that on the British coast, the Codfishery in either case is not very valu- able The real difference is in the fact that the provincial Fishermen never have had the enterprise to avail themselves to any great extent of the benefits of this fishery - 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? If during reciprocity is meant, (within three miles of the shore) our vessels took about 20000 Bbls Mackerel in the best sea- sons Our Mackerel and Menhaden fishery is valuable to the Canadians if they use them - AWARD OF THE FISHERY CUMMISSION. 3061 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State 2 and if so, to what extent and value 2 They buy Menhaden or pogie bait for Mackerel from the Americans The Menhaden fishery is purely American. None have ever been known to frequent British Waters 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in be- ing able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington & That depends en- tirely on their own enterprise They have never yet done much more than fish Of their own coasts. 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries CauSe any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fish- eries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what ex- tent annually 3 No 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them " We have seen some few of their Vessels on our coasts for Mackerel say 20 vessels 250 men 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic Coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries? § of the Fisheries are deep sea fisheries At present all the Cod & Halibut are caught on the Grand, Brown & Georges Banks 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries? Almost entirely for Mackerel º 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits’ During the latter part of the season Mackerel tend in shore and for about 6 weeks the fishing is better in shore On a basis of 300 000 Bbls, as the whole seasons catch for the Massachusetts fleet and allow- ing 100 000 Bbls to be taken in the Gulf of St Lawrence which is a large estimate , or 20 000 Bbls might under favorable circumstances be taken within three miles but even during reciprocity less than . 100,000 Bbls were taken one year both from British and American Wa- ters by the entire Mass fleet 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by Ameri- Call fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in- Shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore? Yes, Untill the 20th of Sept about all the Mackeriel are taken outside of three miles The Magdalen Islands afford good fishing to the last of the season w 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? No. No. Every man that ever caught a mackerel knows that the larger the fleet the better for all 18. Are not more fish caught, by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- Shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone º Certainly, a large proportion of the Canadian Fishery is carried on in small boats near the shore, say within 20 miles, Our fleet, with their immense quantities of bait is of immense advantage to the Canadians 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken & How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- 3062 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore? Menhaden, which are taken for bait for their Oil and the refuse made into Guano worth 60 Dollars per Ton, The gross receipts from this fishery for all purposes would not be less than four million dollars; it is entirely an American fishery. 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting 6tut, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. 'State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. The average cost for a season's work of eight months is about 3000 Dollars or 3,500, as including salt, Bait Pro- visions, Trawls, lines. Gear & Boats insurance wear and tear. * Time of 12 men 8 months $3840,00 The average value of the entire fares from 5 to 8000 dollars 7340 This is when no losses are made. & Out of a fleet of less than 500 Schooners at Gloucester the average loss has been for the last ten years Over 10 ves- sels yearly and 100 lives yearly The vessels and fares are an entire loss as they are insured in the Mutual fish- ing office and all owners of vessels share in the loss 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. The American vessels cost 80 Dollars per ton present Gov't Measurement, the Canadian vessels cost from 30 to 35 Dollars per ton The difference in fitting is in the price of Gear Boats &c. and the Canadian Fishermen are fed on Fish and potatoes principally while the Americans have fresh meat, salt meat Pork Vegetables in fact as good as the markets afford 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries " With all the fisheries on those coasts 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the º's of Washington ? Mackerel principally, some Codfish and Hali- ut p 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen ; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. The Mackerel fishery within three miles of the British coast would probably average under the most favorable circumstances 15 to 20,000 Bbls of Mackerel annual- ly, worth 100000 Dollars net From this amount should be deducted the cost of catching (say 250 vessels, 6 weeks, together with time of men employed Bait salt & c, in fact the fish are worthless in the water. The Gulf of St Lawrence Mackerel fishery probably produces 100000 Bbls of Mackerel less than one fifth are caught within three miles of the shore. The Statistics of Mass fisheries shows that when totally excluded from AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3063. the inshore fisheries our vessels have caught more Mackerel than when freely admitted to them, consequently the only advantage obtained is the privilege of free ports and freedom from annoyance 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada? If so, to what extent, and what is the value 2 Yes, American Cod Fishermen buy large quan- tities of Bait from the Canadian shore Fishermen, Our vessels never catch their Bait always buy it some vessels pay as high as $1000,00 yearly to British fishermen for Bait 26. Do not American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and Various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 2 If so, in what ports, and to what extent 2 Aud, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season º Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantagd. Yes, 200 000 Dollars is yearly paid for Bait. During Re- ciprocity, nearly all the American fleet refitted in the Straits of Canso and Ports of Prince Edward Island and Halifax At a cost of not less than $500 000,00 This trade had grown to such dimensions that upon the imposition of the harsh measures adopted by the Canadian Govt against American Fishermen there was a universal outcry on the part of the merchants and inhabitants of these ports. - 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- Sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and Within the three-mile limit? If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, What is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, What is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of Such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 2 The Codfishery on the Banks employ about 200 Vessels & 2400 Men The Mackerel Fishery from 3 to 400 Vessels 6000 Men Value of Vessels about 2000'000 Dol- lars, Value of Mackerel about 700 000 Dollars Value of Codfish & Halibut about 1000 000 Dollars No Codfish or Halibut of any account are taken within three miles. About 15 or 20 000 Bbls Mackerel were usually taken in the best season during reciprocity within thyee miles, in poor seasons much less, * * 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it Consist º That depends entirely on the amount of mackerel taken If mackerel are plenty, the price is consequently reduced and the mackerel fishery is at all times precarious The whole matter is conditional and problematical The convenience of the ports, freedom from annoyance and capture is the chief consideration, The Mackerel fishery may be best on our own coast for years, it may be better on the Canadian coast, the liberty to pursue the fish wherever they may be is the main advantage in opening the coast fishery, Statistics shows that our vessels have done better on our own coasts when totally excluded from the British fisheries than when freely admitted to them 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington. any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so; what 3064 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate 2 We never dry nets or cure fish on their shores that idea applied when the fisheries were carried on in small boats The right to transship cargoes to buy or sell is a right which every American Wes. sel has in English ports, as English Vessels have in American ports The Dominion Govt under the clause in their law (of preparing to fish) in- cluded every transaction of a commercial nature and perpetrated out- rage after outrage on American Vessels, The American fishermen have never accepted the character of outlaws accorded them and claim equal- ity before the law with other citizens engaged in marine business. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? Where we shall receive one dollar’s benefit they will receive 20 the only matter they have for sale is courtesy - 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all de- scriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? See Wol- ume III 9th Census U States. - 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the father- ring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market 2 Yes. Without the markets of the U States the entire fishery of the Dominion would be valueless, except for home consump- tion . - 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. See Vol- ume III 9th Census U States - 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them an- Inually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Canadian Statis- tics will show this. -. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. Our vessels after the repeal of the Reciprocity Treaty paid a License fee of 50 cts per Ton. This was the valuation placed upon the inshore fisheries by the lºominion Govt. We paid, this more to escape annoy- ance and capture on the slightest pretext and for the freedom of their ports, than for the value of the fish, When it was increased to one and afterward 2 Dollars per Ton our vessels could not afford to pay it and it was universally repudiated, The Revenue derived could not have been over 10,000 Dollars and with all the advantages of free ports, free- dom from capture and annoyance, we considered the price of this fishery too high and the Dominion failed to obtain Customers . Then followed the repeal of the license system and the inauguration of a policy which in its details we consider little better than Piracy The value of the Dominion Fisheries depend entirely on the action of the U States Govt, If admitted to free Markets in the United States their fisheries become prosperous, and as they gain, our fishermen must lose, Without the Markets of the United States their fisheries are valueless except for Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3065. home consumption, and the fishermen of the U States can supply the entire demand of our own markets from our own shores and the deep sea fisheries without being indebted to them for a single fish, 500 000 Dollars yearly will not pay for the advantages they gain by the Treaty of Washington. EIARVEY RNOWLTON º EDWARD, A, HORTON STATE OF MASSACEIUSETTS COUNTY OF ESSEX } SS. GLOUGESTER June 21st 1873. Then personally appeared the above named Harvey Knowlton and Edward A. Eſorton, and made oath that the statements herein made including answer to Question 35. are true to the best of their knowledge and belief . Before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 24. - [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING TELE FISEIERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO - ON BEEIALF OF THE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside * : Albion R. Peirce 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 3 I have been to the Bay of St Law- rence Thirty years and also off our own coasts 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information 3 If so, please give some such name. . - 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so & Yes 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Cânadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Menhaden and Mackerel It should be understood that in taking mackerel with the hook when we get a school alongside biting well we may get our whole fare from that School but if we were 5 miles from shore and the Cutters breaks up our fishing we may not find a school ready to bite well again for a month. Mackerel are not like any other fish, one weeks steady catching would make a seasons work for us and if the mackerel should happen to tend off shore and bite well the inshore fishing would be useless to us, but if the fleet should get up a biting schooll say just 3 miles from the shore the annoyance and breaking up of the fleets fishing would be the trou- ble, more time is spent by the fleet in hunting up the mackerel and find- ing Schools that will bite than in the catching 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the year 1854 to 1872, inclusive? If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that infor- mation can be procured. , - * 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the 3066 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. Menhaden are caught only on our coasts, the Canadians have to pay 6 to 8 dollars per barrel, 4 of the Mackerel caught are caught within three miles of our own shores With the same enterprise On their part our inshore fisheries are of as much benefit to the Canadians as theirs is to us, the Menhaden are used at the rate of 6 Bbls to every 100 Bbls Mackerel - • 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? See Statistics 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State 2 and if so, to what extent and value 2 They buy Menhaden bait that are caught by American fishermen and they will probably take their own bait under the treaty º - 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and Gure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? The Menhaden fishery is quite valuable and also the Mackerel fishery and the Canadians with the same enterprise would make our fisheries as valuable to them as theirs could be to us 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen ; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually & The competition of their cheap vessels and crews will lower the price of fish * 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them * The most of their fisheries are carried on in boats and usually within 20 miles of the shore some of their vessels have been with our fleet on our coasts. 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the At- lantic coasts of the British North American provinces, what proportion consists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fisheries & The cod fishery is a deep sea fishery entirely. The Mackerel fishery is in the bay of St. Lawrence about 4 in 120,000 bbls are caught by American fishermen in-shore. - 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries º Mackerel. - 15. If you state that the in-shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the inshore limits” Four-fifths are taken outside the three mile limits when the Tishery was free. - - 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within Shore? yes late in the season mackerel tend in shore, but our vessels do better off shore as the crews are kept on the vessels when if we were inshore they would be off half the time. - 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore Waters ? no. AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3067 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone? most cer- tainly wherever the mackerel are fed they remain. 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken 2 How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three. miles of the Shore ? Clams & Menhaden mixed. 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and man- ning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. For a season's trip to the Bay, for Barrels, salt, pro- visions, Insurance, & wear and tear, 3,000. 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, So far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any differ- ence between the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. not more than one-half the cost of the American vessel The American vessel stands about 100 Dollars per ton rigged and ready for Sea, The Canadian about $50. per ton Their men are fed principally On fish and potatoes. Our vessels have the best supplies the market affords W 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries” all the fisheries 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington 2 The Mackerell is all we take a a general thing - - - 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen ; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent and what is the value * We buy all our bait for all fisheries on the Banks Value $200,000,00 which we pay to British fishermen. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries? If So, in what ports, and to what extent? And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-VeS- sels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing sea- Son? Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. Yes, every vessel going to the Grand Banks and Western banks stop for supplies and Bait at a cost of not less 800 Dol- lars each, The Mackerel fishermen under the Treaty will probably spend as much more, The Trade will amount to nearly if not quite a Million of dollars. 3068 AWARD OF THE FishERY COMMISSION. 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,), both without and within the three-mile limit? If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 2 About 7 or 800 Vessels, 9000 men value 24 Millions. During Reciprocity about of the Mackerel were taken inshore, say 15 to 20000 bbls. We have done much better off our own coasts, For Codfish & Halibut our vessels go to the Grand & Browns Banks. All the Herring are bought from British Fishermen. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it consist? The cost of taking any kind of fish fully equals their value to the pro- ducer all profits are made by the wholesale dealers, In ascertaining the value if 20 000 bbls of Mackerel are taken worth $150 000,00 we must take from that amount the expense of 400 Vessels and 6000 men at least for One months time in taking them. The whole valuation of the shore fishery So far as profits are concerned is absolutely nothing 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any Valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them, to be worth annually, in the aggregate? No we think we had commercial rights in British ports but have been denied them. * ° 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are Concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the Britsh North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? more to them. 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States? 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market. it does. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. refer to the Treasury reports. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada On fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Don’t know of any American vessel ever carrying fish to Canadian ports. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject Which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please State it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. The principal reason for satisfaction on the part of the fishermen of the AWARD OF THIE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3069 United States is the relief from annoyance which the Treaty affords In the prosecution of the fishing business the liberty to take fish at all points where they may tend will scarcely afford them a living. The mackerel fishery is so variable and uncertain that we need all facilities for taking them wherever they are as a few days good fishing Often makes the seasons work, Our own coast furnishes the best Mackerel, and we have done better there than in the bay, but we like to have the privilege of following the Mackerel, and the Canadians will be benefited as much as We are in coming on Our coasts. - * We fully agree A. K. PIERCE, Master of Sch Wm. S. Baker. and endorse GEO. BEARSE, “ . “ “ Col. Cook. Capt. Peirce JAMES R. HAMILTON, “ Thorwaldsten. statements. U JOHN MCDONALD, ‘‘ ‘‘ Electric Flash. Sworn to and subscribed this 5th June 1873 before me, - ADDISON CENTER, Dep. Collector. (Seal.) No. 25. - [conFIDENTIAL. QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO w ON BEELALE OF THE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 Sixty years, Geo. Norwood of the Firm Geo. Norwood & Son Gloucester Mass 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic Sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish & Have been engaged in the Fish- eries for 25 years. - 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If So, please give Some such name. 4. A copy of the treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so * Yes. 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the pro- visions of the Treaty of Washington ? Codfish, Mackerel. Menhaden. 6. Can can give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State, from the years 1854 to 1872, in- clusive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. See Inspector Generals Report. On the Fisheries of Mass. State House, Boston, 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. Mackerel and Menhaden principally, Mackerel has a value which fluctuates from $6.00 to $20.00 per bbl. With the same degree of Enterprise on the part of the Canadians our Coast Fisheries, would be as valuable to them as what they possess would be to our Fishermen. 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken 3.07.0 AWARD JF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? That can be ascertained accurately only by Statistical Returns. - 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State 2 and if so, to what extent and value º They buy Menhaden Bait that are caught by American Fishermen in American Waters, 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in be-, ing able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington & The Canadians have never pursued any important Fishery on our Coasts. Their own shore Fisheries more than equal their Enterprize. 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisher- ies cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually & The answer must be Comparitive. They can pro- duce Fish at one half the expense of American Fisherman, and it would naturally affect the price of Fish - 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them 2 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries? Cod-fishery & Halibut fishery are entirely a Deep Sea Fishery. The Mackerel Fishery is both a shore and deep Sea Fishery, About one fifth of the Entire Mackel Fishery can be considered as a Shore Fishery. 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries º Mackerel. - 15. If you state that the in shore fisheris are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 2 Under the Resprocity Treaty, the Entire British Shore free more than 4ths were caught outside the 3 mile limits. 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British Anferica taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within Shore? Yes. ! 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters? No. + 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- Shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large Quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone 2 Yes : it is a well established fact founded on experience of over 40 years that in the Mackerel Fishery the larger amount of vessels in the Fleet the bet- ter for all. 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken º EIow much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ?, Clams & Menhaden mixed are the best, Clams are found on both American & English Shores. Menhaden are found only on the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. . 3071 American Shore. The value of the Menhaden Fishery is from 300 to 500 thousand dollars at Gloucester 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing and manning a Vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the Cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port, $3000.00 for a season to the Bay including Bait, Barrels, Salt, Insurance, Provisions and the Wear & Tear. 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same Questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference between the Cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these re- Spects, explain what the difference is, and the reason for it. Cost of American Vessels $100.00 per ton rigged. Cost of British Vessels from 40 to 60. Cost of running American Vessels per year from 3 to $4000.00. Crew's time 12 Men each one year $3600.00. Canadian Vessels are pro. visioned much cheaper than the Americans. their men living principally On fish and Potatoes ours on the best the Market affords 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries 3 All of them. . 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & The mackerel is the only available Fish to be caught by American Vessels. - - 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen ; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent Waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. - 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada? If so, to what extent, and what is the value 2 The Fisherman do not catch any Bait them. selves. They buy all from the Shore Fisherman. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 2 If So, in what ports, and to what extent " And; if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-ves- Sels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season 7 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. American Vessels engaged both in the Deep Sea & Shore Fisheries off the Dominion Coast expend $1600.00 to $1000.00 each for Supplies and Refitting amounting to about $400,000 00 in trade. Many of the Inhabitants of the Shores of the Provinces literally depend upon the American Fisherman for their Living. 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- Sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and Within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so en- gaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, What is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- 3072 . AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 2 About 400 Wessels were engaged in these Fisheries at the time of the Resprocity. At present under the restricted Policy many more American Vessels pursue the Deep Sea Fisheries for Cod-fish & Halibut since the introduction of Ice for the preservation of Fish this business has been more profitable as the Fish are sold fresh. Vessels are worth from $60.00 to $70.00 per ton. The fish taken average about 25 million dollars. In the most favorable season about $100 000 00 bbls are taken in the Bay of St Lawrence less than 4th of these are taken within 3 mile of the Shore. This is the entire and only fishery used by Americans. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived ; and in what does it consist º Any actual profit on the Fishing Business never had any ex- istance our Vessels have caught more Mackerel when entirely excluded from the Inshore Limit, * 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before ; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate 7 No We always had the right although deprived of it, to land Fish or other merchandise in Bond to be transshipped to the U. S. In this as in all others Our Government have not protected us. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? Vastly more to the Provinces in every particular 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market 2 Most certainly Fat Mackerel shipped to warm Climates would have nothing left but the Bones before they were sold. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Refer to the Treasury Reports. * 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Dritain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. The simple Privilage of fishing within the In-shore limits of the Domin- ion has under any Circumstances a very small value. The total miscon- ception of the value and profits of the Fishing business held by Parties not practically interested has given an assumed value to the fish while in the Water, The investments in the Fishing business, including Ves- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3073 Sels, Wharves, Ware-houses, Provisions, Lines, Nets, Sails, Rigging, Boats, Salt, Barrels, and the time of the men engaged reckoned at the Same rates of pay as that obtained by regular Seamen or practical oper- atives on the Land in any other business, has never yet or never will return more than 6 per ct upon the whole amount. After paying 4 per ct on the investment of Capital and for the time of the Men and the Wear & Tear and Depreciation of the Vessels, there will be no margin left. for the purchase of Fish in the Water. It should be remembered in dealing with this subject that we should confine the value of Fish or Mackerel in the hands of the Producer. That the values attached to Fish as appearing in Prices currant, are nearly double the value of the Eish in their raw state before landing. What is cheifly the desire of the American fisherman is to be protected from the continual annoy- ance. The danger of Capture upon the slightest reasons and the well- known hostility of the Dominion Government, from which they have never been afforded any protection, even from our own Government. The bounties paid by the U. S. have been more than sufficient to estab- lish the entire Fishing interest. With these withdrawn and our Mar- kets open to Canadian Fishermen free of duties who can produce the fish for less than 3, the cost of American fisherman the Fisheries of the U. S. are in danger of entire destruction. GEO NORWOOD I hereby endorse the above statements. JAMES S AYER Firm of Dennis & Ayer engaged in Fishing business 35 years STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS } SS COUNTY OF ESSEX d GLOUCESTER June 21st Subscribed and sworn to. Before me (Seal.) DAVID W. E.OW Notary Public No. 26. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISEIERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO ON BEEIALE OF TELE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you re- Side 3 Andrew Leighton Aged 52 Gloucester Massachusetts. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the Catch of the different kinds of fish 3 Have fished in Gulf of St. Law- rence during a period of twenty-eight years for Mackerel, also have been engaged in other kinds of fishing in the meantime, Since, for the last five years, have carried on business as owner and fitter. 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please to give some such name. Most of the members offirms (in the Fish- ing Business) in Gloucester have been personally engaged in fishing in the Bay of St. Lawrence. I would mention the names of Capt Benjamin Bearse, Capt Robert Reeves. 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States 193 E. 3074. Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done Soº I have examined the Same. 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under tha provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Codfish Halibut. Haddock. Polluck Hake—Menhaden. Mackerel, Swordfish &c. 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. Have never seen any es- timates, the quantity is enormous, probably 300 000 Bbls Mackerel Mass & Maine Menhaden probably 200,000 Dollars Cod haddock pollock, 1,500,000 Dollars 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. See as above Mackerel $1000,000 Menhaden $2000,000 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? The only fish taken inside the three mile limit on the Canadian coast, is Mackerel. The Herring taken at the Magdalenes are already free to us. : 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State 7 and if so, to what extent and value 2 They purchase bait in large quantities for Mackerel. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? This will be entirely owing to their enterprise 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually 3 Probably not. Except their vessels. Costing less. they could carry on the business profitably when we could not 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them ? None that I know of at pres- ent; 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- i." Fully nine tenths of the Fishing is done outside the three mile imit 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in- Shore fisheries & Mackerel 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please State what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 2 The advantage to us of being able to fish inside the three mile AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3075 limit is, that we are able to follow the Mackerel wherever we can catch them, the proportion cannot be accurately determined because it varys with the season Should not think more than one tenth of the Mackerel are caught inshore w 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore ? This is true, yet late in the season they sometimes tend in shore, the great body of mackerel is usually found away from the shore. 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? No they are not. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone 2 This is cer- tainly true, and it saves the Canadian boat fishermen a large sum as they have the benefit of the bait thrown which otherwise they would have to buy themselves 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken º Eſow much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British provinces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Pohagan. Bait is best. Is taken on Coasts of Maine & Massachusetts. Most of it is taken within three miles of shore. Do not know the aggre- gate value, think about $2000,000 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. The average cost of running a fishing-vessel at Gloucester is from 3 to 4000 Dollars per year for Salt Barrels Bait Ice Provisions &c Crew of 12 men value of Time, $3,600,00 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessels in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. The Canadian vessels are not so well built more soft wood is used An American fishing vessel cost new all rigged ready for sea 100 Dollars per ton Canadian not over 55 Dollars per ton Canadians live cheaper On fish & potatoes We cannot get crews to go in our vessels unless they have as good as the markets afford 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries d'h the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries Am acquainted as stated in article second with all the fish- €T16S 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fisherman under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackerel. - 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch 3076 . Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value? Our Cod & Halibut catchers bound on Voyages to the Grand & Western Banks, buy bait on N. Scotia & Cape Breton shore to a considerable Extent say 200 000 Dollars per year 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries 2 If so, in what ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season 3 IExplain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. They purchase Supplies in large quantities especially in Gut of Canso, Halifax, also, at Charlottetown & Georgetown, P. E. I. The Mackerel Fleet usually purchase supplies, for vessel & and crew amounting from $300, to $600, each vessel. 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit” About 400 vessels. averaging 60 Tons & 14 men Costing from $100.00 to $125.00 per Ton New Measure Mackerelling 200 Bank Fishing - 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it con- sist Ž When mackerel are found inshore it is generally at the mouths of rivers or Creeks, and unless we can go there to catch them, the priv- ilege is not worth much to us * 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate º They will have no more rights than they were really entitled to before. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States? It seems to be the unanimous opinion of American Fishermen that the effect of the Treaty will be better for them than for us. 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market. It does. 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3.077 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada. on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them an- nually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights In respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in re- Spect of it. ANDREW LEIGEITON WALTER M FALT STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS & COUNTY OF ESSEX SS - GLOUCESTER, June 21st 1873 Subscribed and sworn to, t Before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 27. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO ON BEEIALE OF THE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside? W C Wonson of Gloucester Essex Co Mass 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 3 I have been practically engaged in the fishing business for fourteen years Am now conducting general fishing business fitting eight vessels 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 I have 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackerel Menhaden Cod- fish Pollock Haddock Hake Herring 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive 2 If you can do this, please do so; and, if not, please state where that information can be procured. See reports of Ins General of the State Mass 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. 3078 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Our Shore fisheries are worth some years more than the Canadians' Mackerel are an erratic fish, our shore Mackerel are worth 5 Dollars per Bbls. more than the Bay Mackerel, The Menhaden fishery entirely a shore fishery and are taken for oil Bait Guano &c is worth from 2 to $4000,000 00 Mackerel Fishery about the same though liable to vary 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? See Canadian Statistics See U States Statistics 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State; and, if so, to what extent and value 2 Pogie Bait is ob- tained by them by purchase - & * 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in be- ing able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that. contained in the Treaty of Washington ? They would save the value of bait, say $75,000, but they do not do business as we do 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen ; and, if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually 2 Do not think it would affect us other than they will have cheap vessels, & there will be some competition’ 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them 2 Do not know not many 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries? Principally Deep Sea fishing until late in the fall not more than * part would be taken in shore including all fisheries 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries º Mackerel * 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits º Should not think that more than one sixth part are taken within three miles of the shore. 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within Shore ? Yes - 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial inshore waters ? No - 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large Quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone º There is. The more VeSSels the better f 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken º Eſow much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Clams & Manhaden; Manhaden are found only on the Ameri- can Shores, 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and man- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3079 ning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. Pogie Fishing requires a crew of from 10 to 15 men, at a cost of from 300 to 500 per month, Mackerel Fishing requires a crew from 12 to 20 men, Cost about the same. Cod Fishing requires a crew of about 13 men, Cost including salt fitting Insurance &c. about $400 per month. -- 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tWeen the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American Vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. I don't know the expense of fitting Canadian vessels but should think that they could be fitted and run at least one third cheaper than American Vessels could. - * 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, With the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Que- bec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries 2 I am well acquainted with them. - 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to Aunerican fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackerel Halibut & Cod fish, 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen ; also the amount and the annual value of the Catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. Dont know 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value? They sometimes buy their Bait of the Cana- dians at a value of not less than $200,000.00. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries? If So, in what ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing- Vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing Season & Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money- Value of that advantage. Yes. Our vessels often refit in the ports of the Dominion at an expense of from $100 to $600. 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing- Vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many ves- sels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, What is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and What is the proportion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 2 About 600 or 700 Vessels are annually engaged they average about 65 tons employing about 8000 men, - w 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles 3080 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it con- sist Ž In case we are deprived of fishing at the mouth of the Rivers the Mackerel Fishery would be rendered almost valueless, 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washing- ton any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to re- pack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before ; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth an- nually, in the aggregate? No the Canadians are more benefited than We are. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? It is more benefit to the Canadians than to the American Fishermen. 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the only market. Yes. No fat mackerel are carried south of Hatteras, they are all consumed in the Northern Middle and Western States 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. The statistics will show think about from 200 to $300,000.00 The importations would be doubled by free markets. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the TJnited States. If you know anything bearing upon this which subject you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. The TJnited States should have claimed at least a half million yearly as the fisheries that are to be affected depend solely on the U States markets for their value and we get no advantages except the release from annoy- ance. Our Mackerel fleet can take all the Mackerel that is wanted for home Consumption off our own coasts, and we are simply building up a foreign fishery which is valueless without our markets for the privilege of using British harbors, and giving them our trade which is worth 10 times more to them than any fisheries are to us. . n WM. C. WONSON STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS , , COUNTY OF ESSEX | SS * GLOUCESTER June 21st 1873 Then personally appeared the above named William C. Wonson and made Oath that the foregoing statements by him subscribed are true Before me - & (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3081 No. 28. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING TEIE FISEIERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO ON BEEIALE OF TEIE UNITED STATES. 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 7 Geo Friend & Co. Gloucester Mass. 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish 2 Have caught them, cured them, & sold them, now prosecuting the fishing Business. 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. Could give the names of 40 Fishing Firms, but you have probably sent them these questions, 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- º articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 We 8,V6. * 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those Which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the pro- visions of the Treaty of Washington 2 All Kinds that we have the right to take upon their shores, Mackerl & Menhaden in particular 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclusive 3 If you can do this please do so; and if not please state where that in- formation can be procured. Can get all the required information from the reports of the General Inspector, of our own and other fishing States, 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fisher- men under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. Mackerel and Porgies are taken on our shores, the Porgie being entirely our own shore fishery, our shore Mackerel are worth, and will bring mrore right along, than the Bay Mackerl. they seem to be a better fish every way, and if there is any advantage it is in favor of the Canadian fishermen almost in the proportion of 2 to 1. - 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters Off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? You had better consult the statistics of both countries, and you will learn the full quantity & value of the whole thing, • 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State 7 and if so, to what extent and value * Only by purchasing as we term them Slivers or Porgie Bait, slivered ready for use. 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? same as their fisheries are to us. 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries Cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these | 3082 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION, fisheries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually * We think it will injure our business a great deal, by their running cheaper vessels, & fitting cheaper can undersell us every time Twill result in great loss to the American fishermen 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage, and value, and the number of men employed upon them " We dont think there are any 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion consists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fisheries? # are caught off shore, and some vessels dont take a fish inshore of any kind. - 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries º Mackerel—Cod and Halibut. - 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits 2 . The Mackerel which are taken inshore do not Amount to but a very small part of the vessels trips, they are only taken late in the Season and then about one half perhaps of our fleet are at home and do not return to the Bay. Take off the annoyance of being chased by cut- ters, and having to keep watch of an imaginary 3 mile line, and We dont think our fishermen would care one cent wether they caught a mackerel inside 3 miles. We dont consider they are worth one dollar. 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore ? Yes Thrible. 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters? Well we guess not much. Bene- fitted a great deal. 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in-shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone? The chances are twice as good. * 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken? How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Clams and Porgies, or Menhaden. Porgies are caught only on Our Own Shore. - 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and manning a Vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the Cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. Pogie fishing not over 12 men, principally 10 Cost- ing about $500, per month, Mackerelling, not over 20 men. will Aver age. 15 men. Cost trifle more. Cod—12 men Cost about same as Porgie fishing. - 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3083 tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. We all Know that Canadians can fit build and run their vessels cheaper than we can, but how much cheaper we are unable to say. We think we should place the matter about right to say # cheaper than We Can build, man and run our vessels. And we are confident we have placed the figure low. 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? Well acquainted with all of them, 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington? Mackerel—Cod & Halibut. 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (Say from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. You must consult statistics again, for we cant give you the desired information. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value? Buy lots of Bait from them, and pay from 2 to 3 hundred thousand dollars. - * 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries? If so, in what ports, and to what extent? . And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-vessels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing season 3 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. Our vessels often go in to their different Ports, refit, and buy everything for the voyage, and pay the Dominion merchants all the way from $50 to $800, Have paid this Amt ourselves, for one vessel. 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing- vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the proportion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile-limit 2 600,—60 tons—8,000, men. Statistics will give you the rest. s 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it con- sist 3 None whatever are added to the profits, r 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before ; if so, What are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate? Canadian fishermen reap Double the benifit that the American fishermen do. 3684. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States? Answer same as Question 29 * - 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? Cant Say. 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the ºet. Eat mackerel find a ready and about the only market in the U. S. e 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Statistics will show you the whole thing, we should think $250,000 was about right And importations would more than dowble up by free markets. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Dont know 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. Our impression in relation to fishing inside the three mile limit is simply this. It will be a detriment instead of a benifit. One reason why it will be so is that our vessels would be likely to lie in the harbors of |Port Hood, and along their coast, when they ought to be out on the fish- ing ground. To take fish inside the three mile limit is of no value to the American fishermen. It is only when our fishermen are taking fish, say from 4 to 5 miles from the land, of being bored to death by cutters, sent out of their harbors when they seek them for shelter from the storms which frequent that coast, of not being permitted to buy Any- thing except wood and water, and hardly that that this whole trouble lies. Our fishermen only want protection in this matter, and the mack- erel they would take inside the three mile mile line. we would stake our reputation, would not much more than pay for the Bait they used. Attest to the foregoing. GEO ERIEND & CO. STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS COUNTY OF ESSEX S. S. - GLOUCESTER June 21st 1873 Then personally appeared John J. Somes and for himself and the other members of the firm of Geo. Friend & Co. made oath that the foregoing statements subscribed in the firm’s name are true Before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public Award of THE FISHERY commission. 3085 - No. 29. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING TELE FISEIERIES TO BE PRO- POUNDED TO ON BEEIALE OF THE UNITED STATES. - 1. What is your name and age, and in what town and State do you reside 2 Frederic Gerring Gloucester Mass 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic Sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish * I have been practically engaged in the fisheries 35 years & now conducting the general fishing business With 7 Wessels 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the opportunity of obtaining similar information 3 If so, please give some such name. Alfred Low & Co, F. G. Wonson & S. G. Wonson 2d. 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so? I have. 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the pººns of the Treaty of Washington ? Mackerel, Cod, , Herring, Ogles, 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive 2 If you can do this please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. I would refer you to the reports of the Inspector General of the State, 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fisher- men under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington ? Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each Rind. not able to state 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters Off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? Bureau of Statistics Washington D. C., 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State 2 and if so, to what extent and value? for all their Bait : for the mackerel fisheries. - 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and 'dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington & unable to State 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries Cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually * No, except more competition 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the Inumber of men employed upon them 2 Should say about 15 vessels 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic 3086 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fisheries º Should think about 80 per cent are deep sea fisheries. 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries? Mackerel late in the year 15. If you state that the in shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits, and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits' not one tenth part of the mackerel taken at the Bay of St. Lawrence are taken within the inshore limits - 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by American fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in-shore limits; and in the summer season especially, are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore ? YES - 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? NO. - 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- Shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large Quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone? Yes 19. What is the best bait for the mackerel, and where is it principally taken " How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the Shore ? Pogie or Menhaden, an American fish, taken off Coast of U. S. Value of this fishery about $1,000,000 yearly 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and man- ning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo and of returning to the home port. Pogie fishing, Crew 10 men cost of Salt Bbls, pro- &isions déce $400, time 3 weeks mackerl fishing about the same Cost of a voyage to Grand Banks of a Schooner of 80 tons about $2700, for a term of 2 mos or 10 weeks - 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the Same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, So far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. About one half what it costs to fit an American vessel 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Que- bec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? 20 years all of them 4 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington? Codfish—Halibut & Mackerel 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (Say from from 1854 to 1872 inclusive) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles dis- tant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. Cannot give the data required Should think that the Deep Sea fisheries three miles from Shore were worth $2000,000 00 less cost of taking them AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3087 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada. ? If so, to what extent, and what is the value? Yes $200,000 worth a year 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various article for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries? If So, in what ports, and to what extent 2 And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-Ves- Sels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing sea- Son 7 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. Yes, 10 years ago about all of the American fleet refitted in the Straits of Canso, N. S., and their trade was a great as- sistance to the natives there, say $500,000 - 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing-ves- Sels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit” If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish so caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of Such Catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit # 700 Vessels, total tonnage, 455,000 tons, costing about $60 per ton about 10,000 men employed and the value of the products of the fisheries of this district for the year ending Dec. 31, 1872 was valued at $3,437,000,—Gross. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it con- sist 2 not much, not over 5 per cent 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before ; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate? no, I consider we had these right always 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British sº American Provinces as to the people of the United States? Yes IR, 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all descriptions which are annually shipped to the United States? No date at hand 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the Only market. No, mey of their fish are exported direct to foreign coun- tries other than the U. S., - 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Cannot Say 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Cannot Say 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in 3088 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject Which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please State it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. GLOUCESTER, MASS. June 11, 1873, FRED. GERRING part owner of Six fishing Vessels, 20 years engaged in the fishing business, - STATE OF MASSACEIUSETTS } SS COUNTY OF ESSEX, e n GLOUCESTER June 21st 1873 Then personally appeared the above named Frederic Gerring and made oath that the foregoing statements by him subscribed, are true to the best of his knowledge and belief. Before me - - - (Seal.) à DAVID W. LOW, Notary Public. No. 30. [CONFIDENTIAL.] QUESTIONS RESPECTING THE FISHERIES TO BE PRO. POUNDED TO , ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES. 1. What is you name and age, and in what town and State do you reside º Frederick G. Wonson of Gloucester, Essex Co, Mass 2. What opportunities have you had for becoming acquainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic sea-fisheries, and the value of the catch of the different kinds of fish & Have been practically engaged, both as Fisherman, and owner for the past twenty two years, am now fitting fourteen vessels 3. Can you give the names of other persons in your neighborhood who have also had the Opportunity of obtaining similar information ? If so, please give some such name. F Gerring Walen & Co and others 4. A copy of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, known as the Treaty of Washington, is hereto annexed. Will you ex- amine articles 18 to 22 inclusive, and state that you have done so 2 I have examined articles 18 to 22 - 5. What kinds of fish frequent the waters of your State, especially those which are to be thrown open to the Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington 2 Mackerel, Herring Pogies, Codfish &c, * 6. Can you give a statement of the kinds and quantities of fish taken annually off the coast of your State from the years 1854 to 1872, inclu- sive 2 If you can do this, please do so; and if not, please state where that information can be procured. See Report Inspector General of Tish State of Mass 7. If you are able to do so, will you state the amount and value of the American fisheries which are to be thrown open to Canadian fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington & Please state them in detail, showing the different kinds of fish, and the value of each kind. Shore, Menhadn fishery $2,000,000.00 Shore, Mackerel fishery $1,500,000 } gross. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3089 The Mackerel caught off the New England Coast have been worth from 3 to 5 dollars more per Barrel than the Bay of St Lawrence of the same Quality. - 8. What quantity and value of each kind of fish are annually taken by Canadian fishermen, and what by American fishermen, in the waters off the coasts which are to be thrown open to competition by the Treaty of Washington ? The Cauadians have not engaged in the American fish- eries to any extent they have hardly had enterprise sufficient to take the fish in ther own waters. 9. Do Canadian fishermen procure bait or supplies in the waters of your State 7 and if so, to what extent and value 2 Pogie Bait is ob- tained by them - 10. What is the probable annual value to Canadian fishermen in being able to procure bait, to land and dry their nets, and to repack and cure their fish on the coasts of your State, without any other restriction than that contained in the Treaty of Washington ? Their own enterprise will determine that l 11. Will the admission of Canadian fishermen to our in-shore fisheries cause any detriment or hinderance to the profitable pursuit of these fisheries by our own fishermen; and if so, in what manner, and to what extent annually * Do not think that it would affect us materially other than they will have cheap vessels & there will be more competition 12. What number of Canadian vessels and boats are engaged in the fisheries of your State, and what are their tonnage and value, and the number of men employed upon them 7 Do not know - 13. Of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen off the Atlantic coasts of the British North American Provinces, what proportion con- sists of the deep-sea fisheries, and what proportion of the in-shore fish- eries 3 Principally deep-sea fishing until late in the fall say #3 is out- Side of 5 miles. * 14. For what description of fish do American fishermen pursue the in-shore fisheries & Mackerel 15. If you state that the in-shore fisheries are pursued wholly or chiefly for mackerel, please state what proportion of mackerel is taken within the in-shore limits and what proportion is taken outside of the in-shore limits. Should not think that more than one fifth part are taken within three mile limit, or about from 12 to 20,000 Bbls 16. Is not much the larger quantity of mackerel caught by Ameri- can fishermen off the coasts of British America taken outside the in- shore limits; and in the summer season especially are not mackerel generally found on the banks, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and not within shore? Yes; on banks Bradly and Orphan, and around the Magdalen Islands - 17. Are Colonial fishermen injured by permitting American fishermen to fish in Colonial in-shore waters ? I do not think they are on the con- trary, I believe they are benefitted - 18. Are not more fish caught by Colonial fishermen, when fishing in- shore, alongside a fleet of American fishing-vessels, from which large quantities of bait are thrown out, than when fishing alone º There is 19. What is the best bait for mackerel, and where is it principally taken & How much of it is taken within three miles of the shore, and what is the annual value to the United States, or to the British Prov- inces, as the case may be, to take such bait within three miles of the shore ? Pogies—which are taken on the New England shores only— think the value of the Pogie fishery cannot be less than two millions of dollars. - 194 F. 3090 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 20. Please state as to each class of fisheries carried on from your State or district, the cost of fitting out, equipping, furnishing, and man- ning a vessel for carrying it on, estimating it by the average length of the cruise. State, as far as possible, in detail the elements which go to make up the cost of taking and delivering a full cargo, and of re- turning to the home port. Generally the crews of the Pogie catchers consist of about 10 men each—time about 3 weeks per trip—cost $400– Bank fishing $400 per month—this includes barrels, salt, cost of filling, Insurance, &c, Mackerel fishing 21. When you have fully answered question 20, please answer the same questions as to vessels fitted out, equipped, furnished, and manned from the Dominion of Canada, including Prince Edward Island, so far as you are able to do so. If you state that there is any difference be- tween the cost of the Canadian and the cost of the American vessel in these respects, explain what the difference is and the reason for it. Should think that the Canadians Could prosecute the fisheries at one- half the expense we could—owing to their much cheaper vessels— cheaper men and cheaper grub, 22. Are you acquainted, and for how long, and in what capacity, with the fisheries on the coasts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, or Prince Edward Island, or with either, and if either, with which of these fisheries? Am acquainted with all kinds. 23. What kind of fish frequent the waters of those coasts which are to be thrown open to American fishermen under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington 7 Mackerel principally 24. Please state in detail the amount and the annual value (say from 1854 to 1872, inclusive,) of the fisheries which are so to be thrown open to American fishermen; also the amount and the annual value of the catch in the adjacent waters which are more than three miles distant from the shore; please state these facts in detail. 25. Do American fishermen procure bait in the waters within three miles of the coast of the Dominion of Canada; if so, to what extent, and what is the value º American fishermen buy bait of Canadians to a large extent, the value of which must be considerable, say $200,000. 26. Do not the American fishermen purchase supplies in the ports of the Dominion of Canada, including bait, ice, salt, barrels, provisions, and various articles for the use of the men engaged in the fisheries; if so, in what ports, and to what extent” And, if that is the case, is it not an advantage to the ports of the Dominion to have the fishing-Ves- sels of the United States in their neighborhood during the fishing sea- son 2 Explain why it is so, and estimate, if you can, the money-value of that advantage. They do purchase supplies to a great extent— should think the fleet would average each $500, at Charlottetown, P. E. I., Canso Strait, and others, and is of immense value to these places. During reciprocity nearly all the American fleets refitted at those ports, in some cases amounting to $1000 or $1500, each vessel 27. Have you any knowledge of how many United States fishing- vessels yearly engage in the fisheries off the Atlantic coasts of the Brit- ish North American Provinces, (excluding Newfoundland,) both without and within the three-mile limit 2 If so, state how many vessels are so engaged, what is the value of their tonnage, what is the number of men employed annually on such vessels, what sorts of fish are taken there, what is the annual value of all the fish SO caught, and what is the pro- portion, or probable proportion, in your judgment, of the amount of such catch taken within three miles of the British coast, and of the amount taken outside of the three-mile limit 3 Should think about 700 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3091 vessels are engaged with a total tonnage 420,000 tons—about 60 tons each worth about $60, per ton—$2,520,000. 28. What percentage of value, if any, is, in your judgment, added to the profits of a voyage by the privilege to fish within three marine miles of the coast; whence is such profit derived; and in what does it con- sist º Do not think the privilege to fish within 3 miles is of any value. Official annoyance is what we complain of 29. Do the American fishermen gain under the Treaty of Washington any valuable rights of landing to dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to transship cargoes, which were not theirs before ; if so, what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to be worth annually, in the aggregate 2 I think we do not gain any rights of any value and the Canadians will be greatly benefitted by the treaty. 30. Is not the Treaty of Washington, so far as the fishing clauses are concerned, more, or quite as, beneficial to the people of the British North American Provinces as to the people of the United States ? The Canadians will have the most benifit 31. What is the amount and value of colonial cargoes of fish of all de- scriptions which are annually shipped to the United States ? Do not know 32. For all No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel, for the larger part of the fat herring, and for all No. 1 salmon, does not the United States afford the Only market. It does 33. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid to the United States on fish and fish-oil imported from Canada, which are to be made free under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. Cannot. 34. If you know what amount of duties is annually paid in Canada on fish and fish-oil imported from the United States, which are to be made free under the provisions of the said Treaty, please state them annually, and by classes, from 1854 to 1872, inclusive. See U States Statistics 35. The object of these inquiries is to ascertain whether the rights in respect of fishing, and fishermen, and fish, which were granted to Great Britain by the Treaty of Washington, are or are not a just equivalent for the rights in those respects which were granted by said Treaty to the United States. If you know anything bearing upon this subject which you have not already stated in reply to previous questions, please state it as fully as if you had been specially inquired of in respect of it. The markets of the United States are the foundation of all the profits of the Mackerel fisheries to the Canadians Without them this fishery is value less: The Fish caught by our vessels on the Ocean Banks are generally very large, These fish are larger than the shore fish caught On the Canadian coast which are smaller and better fitted for the West Indies and Mediteranean trade, The Georges Codfish always bring a larger price than any other consequently the shore fisheries for Cod fish are of little value If we are to be excluded from the mouths of Irivers in taking Mackerel the Mackerel fishery also will not amount to any thing FREDERIC G. WONSON, of John F, Wonson & Co STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS } SS COUNTY OF ESSEX GLOUCESTER June 21st 1873. Subscribed and sworn to, by above named Frederic G. Wonson Before me o (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public 3092 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 31. I Charles EI. Pew of Gloucester in the County of Essex and Common- Wealth of Massachusetts, being duly sworn doth depose and say; I am forty years old and have been engaged in the fishing business ever since I entered my fathers store as a boy of fourteen years old. Our firm is John Pew & Sons, my brother and myself are the sons—We own twenty (20) fishing vessels and have averaged as many as that number, their tonnage varies from forty (40) to one hundred (100) tons each, they are exclusively engaged in the cod and mackerel fisheries. Last year we had two vessels only engaged in the mackerel fishery in the Canadian Waters and that not in fishing inshore. Since the fishery clauses of the Treaty of Washington took effect viz 1872, we have had four years experience of the operation of the free fishing clauses. During those years we have caught mackerel to the value of $167,000m as shown by our sales in the United States waters and $39,600m worth in British waters; of which $39,600m worth I think hardly any were taken within three miles of the shore. Our ves- sels having chiefly fished at the Magdalen Islands. During the same four years our catch of codfish &c has been $475,000m no part of which was caught within three miles of the British shore but all in the deep seas and on the coast of the United States. Seven eighths of the en- tire codfish catch has been off the coasts of the United States. Since 1872 the percentage of our catch of mackerel taken off the British coast has decreased being in 1875 only $7,800 out of $156,014, total fish produc- tion. The shore fisheries of the United States are far more valuable than those off the British coasts. The value of the fisheries on the British coast has been steadily diminishing. The quality of the mack- erel taken off the British coast has been growing poorer and that off the United States coast has grown better for some years past. - The amount of bait bought by the vessells of our firm of the inhabitants of the British Provinces was in 1874 about $500-worth in 1875 about $800-worth, this bait was fresh herring for our vessels bound to the banks of Newfoundland to fish for cod. We have never caught any bait in British waters. Few if any United States vessels catch any bait in their waters. All our mackerel bait consists of salted porgies taken off the U. S. coast; this fish is not found in the British waters: they are a warm water shore fish and are rarely found beyond Mt. Desert which is considered their eastern and northern limit. The pogies are to some extent bought by the Colonists as bait for mackerel, their only other bait for mackerel is herring which is much inferior. The right to land and dry nets or cure fish on shore is of no value to anybody, this practice has become wholly obsolete, the whole mode of fishing to which this re- lates ceased more than a generation ago. All fish both Cod and mack- erel are brought home to cure the fishing vessels do not even cure their own catch, but sell them green to be cured by fish dealers and packers. The entire fishing fleet of Gloucester in August 1875 was in all 392 ves- sels, the number has been about the same for ten (10) years past though the average tonnage has increased. In 1875 during the summer not over 35 vessels entered the Bay of St Lawrence or any other British waters for Mackerel, the rest fished off the coasts of the United States alone; except about 100 on the banks of Newfoundland. As I have al- ready stated the percentage caught in British waters has regularly de- creased for five years past. - The United States fishermen import nothing into the British Prov- inces, the provincial fishermen import into the United States all their AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3093 fat mackerel and nearly all their poor mackerel Fat mackerel spoil When carried into southern latitudes and there is no market for them except in the United States and there not south of Chesapeake Bay. The United States also furnished the chief market for the large codfish, Which sell here to better advantage than anywhere else, the small cod- fish caught by the provincial fishermengo to the West Indies, Spain and Great Britain. 3. Nearly all the smoked herring from the provinces come into the United States. The alewife fishery, salmon fresh and salt; large amounts of fish oils nearly all that is produced in the provinces come into the United States. The effect of free importations since the Treaty of Washington has been very injurious to the fishing interests of the U. S. the competition caused by it has nearly ruined the profits of the business. And inasmuch as the cost of building and equipping a vessel in the provinces is much less than in the United States, from a third to a Quarter less—if there were as many fishermen in the provinces as in the United States and they had equal capital, skill and energy the princi- pal fishing business would be transferred to the provinces. My business experience is that the effect of the present treaty is and that of the former Reciprocity Treaty during its continuance, was, that the free importation of fish from the British provinces is a great injury to the United States fishermen and far outweighs any benefit they may derive from fishing inshore As to the effect upon the prices of fish to the consumer of free importa- tions under the treaty, there has not yet been any perceptable reduction of prices in the retail business although four years out of the ten named in the treaty have already elapsed. In fact, the profits of the fishing busi- neSS are so small that it is no exaggeration to say that a fish in the sea has no money value and that the cost of catching is so great that the return upon capital invested in the fisheries is small and does not aver- age as well as the returns from capital in other branches of business, the profit is all made on shore by the curers and dealers who buy from the fishermen. s CELARLES H. PEW COMMON WEALTEH OF MASSACEIUSETTS ESSEX SS GLOUCESTER, Dec 1875 Then personally appeared the abovenamed Charles H. Pew to me known and made oath that all the foregoing statements by hith sub- Scribed are true to the best of his knowledge and belief—before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW - Notary Public I, Alfred Mansfield of Gloucester of the County of Essex and Com monwealth of Massachusetts being duly sworn do depose and say—that I have been engaged in the fishing business for the last 24 years. I am a member of the firm of James Mansfield & Sons—I have had in the Course of the two preceding fishing seasons frequent opportunities for Conversation with intelligent and well informed Nova Scotia captains and fishermen residing in the southern portion of Nova Scotia—that the people of that region are now more extensively than ever turning their attention to the catching of codfish both in their own immedeate waters and on the more distant fishing banks—Attention is being attracted to these fisheries on the part of capitalists who previously have found in 3094. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. other branches of marine business full employment for their money and have been unwilling to engage in a business paying so poor returns as the fisheries— The Nova Scotians who have at their own doors what might be an im- mense source of wealth have been lacking an available out-let for the surplus product of their fisheries beyond that which their own markets supply, but under the existing state of affairs between the United States and Great Britain this want is fully met—Since the autumn of 1873 the Grand Banks Codfishery has been as a whole unproductive and such stocks of fish as the American vessels have produced have been dis- posed of without difficulty, but in the event of a large catch which would fill all the markets of our own to overflowing the presence of a large amount of English fish thrown into the market on equal footing with our own and at greatly reduced cost of production from our own, thereby enabling them to be sold at a profit to their owners when American fish would have to be sacrificed, would be a blow of great severity to the en- tire New England Codfishery— At the present time there are in our market a greater number than usual of English parties in pursuit of a cheap class of fishing schooners, and I have known within the past year of several instances in which ves- sels have been sold to parties from the Provinces to be employed in the codfishing business—I consider that by means of the new treaty between the United States and Great Britain the fishing interests of the British Provinces have received a most favorable and important impulse. ALFRED MANSFIELD COMMON WEALTEH OF MASSA CHUSETTS ESSEX SS - GLOUCESTER, Dec 29th 1875 Then personally appeared the above named Alfred Mansfield to me known and made oath that all the foregoing statements by him sub- scribed are true so far as they depend upon his own knowledge and as far as they depend upon information and belief he believes them to be true— - - —before me— DAVID W. LOW (Seal.) - Notary Public NO. 33. - I George Steele of Gloucester in the county of Essex and Common- wealth of Massachusetts being duly sworn doth depose and say I am and for the last 27 years have been engaged in the fishing business, owning and fitting out vessels for the cod and mackerel fisheries on the North American coast. My vessels have been both on the coasts of the British provinces and of the United States. I had last year in all eleven vesseles. - The codfishery is wholly a deep sea fishery no cod are caught within three miles of the shore. The free fishery clauses of the treaty are there- fore of no value to the United States fishermen engaged in this catch. Nor do the cod fishermen catch their own bait, they carry as bait from home salt and fresh herring ; they also to some extent buy fresh bait in the provinces herring or squid. The effect on the codfish business of allowing free importations into the United States has been and must continue to be very beneficial to the provinces, for they find in the United States their chief market for AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3095 large codfish—their small codfish go to the West Indies and is con- sumed at home. The effect on the codfisheries of the United States is to bring them into severe competition with the Canadians who by reason of the greater cheapness of building and equipping vessells in which they have an advantage over us of from 25 to 50 percent could if they had equal capital and enterprise monopolise the business to the exclusion of Our Own fishermen. - The mackerel are the only fish caught at all in shore, the relative im- portance of mackerel in the trade of the country has for some years been steadily diminishing, they are much less used than formerly. In the Western States whitefish from the lakes are taking their place largely. - The quality of Mackerel caught off the coasts of the British provinces is also much poorer than formerly and the quantity taken much less. Not one tenth of the mackerel caught in British waters are taken within three miles of the shore. * And for the last three or four years the seine fishery for mackerel off the United States coasts has been very successful. In 1875 the catch of the British coast was very small. I have no doubt the free importation of mackerel into the United States is a benefit to the provinces which far more than compensates for all the United States can gain by fishing inshore. The United States is the only market for fat mackerel and almost the only one for the poorer grades. I should rather be subject to the restrictions formerly imposed and not be allowed to fish within three miles of the coast, if duties could be again imposed on fish from the provinces. - GEORGE STEELE COMMON WEALTEI OF MASSA CEIUSETTS. ESSEX SS GLoucestER DeG 29th 1875 Then personally appeared the abovenamed George Steele to me known and made Oath that all the foregoing statements by him subscribed are true So far as they depend upon his own knowledge and as far as they depend upon information and belief he believes them to be true. —before me— DAVID W. LOW (Seal.) Notary Public NO. 34. I Sylvanus Smith of Gloucester in the county of Essex and Common- Wealth of Massachusetts being duly sworn depose and say that I am forty seven years old and am a member of the firm of Smith and Gott, our firm ownes seventeen (17) vessels I have been engaged in the fish- ing business twenty eight years, seventeen years as master of a vessel and eleven years on shore fitting out vessels for the cod and mackerel fisheries—Last year only two out of our whole fleet were engaged in fishing off the Canadian coast—No portion of all the catch last year was taken inshore—In 1874 we had five vessels in Canadian Waters and I should think about one eighth part of the fish caught were taken within three miles of the shore—In 1873 we had six vessels in Canadian Waters and very few fish were taken inshore—For the last eight years the mackerel fishing off the coast of Canada has steadily decreased and become less profitable and fewer and fewer vessels are sent there each year—Most of the mackerel caught are taken on the United States coast by means | 3.096 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. of Seines—fishing for mackerel with seines cannot be profitably carried on in Canadian Waters on account of the roughness of the bottom and shoalness of the water, for this reason American fishermen have al- most entirely ceased to use the Canadian mackerel fishery—All the bait used in mackerel fishing consists of menhaden or porgie which is only found off the coast of the United States, and which the Canadians bought from the American fishermen to a great extent—Now by the Treaty they have equal facilities with us for procuring it—We buy from the Canadians herring and small mackerel to use on the Banks for cod- bait; Our firm has paid as much as $2000.00 the past season for this alone—We often repair and refit our vessels in the Provinces purchas- ing supplies &c and have paid as much as $500rgo for one ship there— I consider the right to land and dry nets cure fish &c on the Canadian shores as of no value—I have never had any of my vessels land for this purpose nor have I ever known of any other vessels doing so— During the past season very few vessels from this town not more than forty out of three hundred and fifty fished in the Gulf of St Lawrence and these only for two or three months— - es - No fish are ever exported from the United States to the provinces while all their large cod and the best quality of their mackerel are sent here; the only fish for which there is a market in the provinces are the small cod and poorer grades of mackerel— I think that the fishermen of the United States will be injured by the Treaty of Washington—The Canadians can build ships cheaper than the Americans and by the free clause of the Treaty they can carry and in some cases have carried their fish directly to the American ports and sold them there—Under the old Reciprocity Treaty the Canadian fishing fleet increased largely but as soon as the repeal of the treaty prevented their taking their fish into the United States free of duty, it became so unprofitable that it was to a great extent given up and vessels which they had begun building for the fishing business were left unfinished on the stocks—Since the present Treaty has taken effect, the business has increased very largely in the Provinces— I consider the inshore fisheries of little value, we send few vessels and they take few fish—All the value of the treaty to our fishermen is the right to traid, buy bait, &c. unmolested and if we could be protected in this, we should much prefer and desire the old tariff—this right to trade we have always claimed but it has been denied to us and we have been harassed in every way— SYLVANU'S SMITH COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ESSEX SS GLOUGESTER Dec 28th 1875 Then personally appeared the above named Sylvanus Smith to me known and made oath that all the foregoing statements by him sub- scribed are true so far as they depend upon his own knowledge and as far as they depend upon information and belief he believes them to be true—before me— -> (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 35. I, Morris Whelen of Gloucester in the County of Essex and Com- monwealth of Massachusetts, being duly sworn do depose and say, that I have been twenty-two years engaged in fishing for mackerel. I have AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3097 been master of a vessel for the lastfifteen years. Most of the time I have fished in the Gulf of St Lawrence, I have in all this time caught very few fish within three miles of the shore—The fish in this Gulf are grow- ing poorer each year, last season they were very scarce around Prince Edwards Island—I have never caught any bait in Canadian waters, but have always carried porgies from Gloucester to use for this purpose—I have never bought any supplies from the Canadians. The only thing that I have ever procured from the shore has been water. - For the last few years many more fish have been taken off the Ameri- can shores than in Canadian waters. I should think the proportion was ten to one I have generally fished off the Magdalen Island MAURIS WHELEN COMMON WEALTEI OF MASSACEIUSETTS ESSEX SS GLOUGESTER Dec 29th 1875 Then personally appeared the above named Morris Whelan to me known and made oath that all the foregoing statements by him sub- scribed are true to the best of his knowledge and belief : before me DAVID W. LOW [Seal.] Notary Public No. 36. I Thomas Grady of Gloucester in the County of Essex and Common- Wealth of Massachusetts being duly sworn do depose and say that I have been engaged in the Cod and Mackerel fishery since 1851 have been Master of a fishing vessel seventeen years—In 1872 fished off the coast of the United States for mackerel in 1873 and 1874 fished in Bay of St Lawrence; in 1875 on the “Georges” Banks, Mackerel on the Canadian coast are much poorer and fewer than formerly and in conse- Quence fewer vessels from this port go there—The only bait for the mackerel is the pogie, which is only found in the United States and which the Canadians buy from us. I have in 1869 bought codfish bait from the Canadians for use on the Grand Banks—I do not think that our fishing inshore would be any detriment to Canadian fishermen—I consider the Treaty of Washington of much more benefit to the Cana- dians than to the fishermen of the United States. THOMAS GRADY COMMON WEALTEI OF MASSACEIUSETTS ESSEX SS GLOUCESTER, Dec 28th 1875 Then personally appeared the above named Thomas Grady to me known and made oath that all the foregoing statements by him sub- scribed are true to the best of his knowledge and belief— Before me DAVIE) W LOW (Seal.) Notary Public * No. 37. I, James G. Tarr of Gloucester in the county of Essex and Common- wealth of Massachusetts being duly sworn do depose and say I am forty five years old and have been engaged in the fishery business for the past fifteen years—I am a member of the firm of J. G. Tarr and Brother, we are the owners of fourteen vessels from fifty to eighty tons burden all of which are engaged in the cod and mackerel fisheries—During 3098 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. the past season only one out of all our vessels has been engaged in fish- ing off the coast of Canada—In 1866 we sent seven vessels out of a fleet of Eight sail to British waters; In 1867 the same number were sent there; In 1868 four vessels—In 1869 three vessels In 1870 four ves- sels, 1871 three vessels, 1872 only two vessels with an increase of fleet to ten sail—1873 four vessels, 1874 with an increase of fleet to twelve sail we sent only four vessels- Since the Treaty we have used the inshore fisheries very little and our principal catch has been at the Magdalen Islands and on the Banks —For the last two years nearly all our vessels going to the Banks of Newfoundland for cod fish have touched at Colonial Ports and pur- chased herring bait there for use on the Banks, they also carry some salted bait from home for the codfishery—There is no inshore fishing for bait on the British Coast by United States vessels—I should con- sider seven eighths of all fisheries pursued by Americans on the Canadian shores consists of deep sea fishing, while only the remaining eighth inshore where only mackerel are caught. I can conceive of no injury to Canadian fishermen that can be caused by our fishing in their waters side by side with them, but I shonla think that it would be a great benefit to them on account of the large amount of bait thrown everboard by American fishermen which attracts the fish—The only bait used for mackerel is the porgie or menhaden which is found entirely in the United States and which all the Canadi- ans have to buy from the Americans in a salted state, this fish (the porgie) is not found in Canadian Waters and is almost the only bait used in the mackerel fishery; if the Canadians were unable to procure this bait, they would be compelled to use herring bait which is much inferior for the purpose—The bait which we buy from them for the cod- fishery consists of herring and some small mackerel— For the last ten years our firm has averaged to pay the Canadians from $800—to $1000r.jp a year for this bait—We are also in the habit of purchasing in the Provinces any supplies, ice &c of which our vessels may be in need our supplies thus purchased amount to about $500—a year on the average—In reference to the purchase of bait from the Americans by Canadian fishermen, I have known vessels to sail from this port with as many as three hundred barrels of porgie bait on board which was sold in Halifax and the Straits of Canso to Canadian fishermen. I think the right of fishermen of either nation under the treaty to land dry nets &c. on the shores of the other, amounts to nothing on either side, All fishing vessels are now in the habit of curing all their fish at the home ports— - During the period of the former Reciprocity Treaty and since the Treaty of Washington, the importations of fish into the United States from the Provinces have been very large and have materially interfered with the profits of our fishermen, this is especially the case with the mackerel almost all of which, that are caught by the Canadians are sent into the United States for sale–Also all their large codfish are sold in the United States as they have a market for the small cod only at home—All their fat herring and No. 1 salmon are sold in the United States— - I consider the Treaty of Washington of much more value to the Prov- inces than to the United States—I should prefer the old duty on fish and would be willing to give up all our rights of inshore fisheries under the Treaty, if the tariff could be renewed—This conclusion is the result of four years—experience under the Treaty of Washington and also un- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3099 der the whole of the former Reciprocity Treaty. As all vessels can be built, equipped and manned in the colonies for a third less than in the United States—consequently if there were as many colonial fishermen as American and they had equal skill and industry they could entirely drive the American fishermen out of the business–- - JAMES G. T.A.R.R COMMON WIEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS ESSEX SS GLOUCESTER, Dec 22d 1875 Then personally appeared the abovenamed James G. Tarr to me known and made oath that all the foregoing statements by him sub- Scribed are true as far as they depend upon his own knowledge and as far as they depend upon information and belief he believes to be true t - before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 38. I John E. Gorman of Gloucester in the county of Essex and Com- monwealth of Massachusetts being duly sworn do depose and say, that I am twenty six years old and have been engaged in the fish- ery business for the last thirteen years during the last five years I have been master of a vessel—I have been engaged in fishing for mackerel in the Bay of St Lawrence every year but two, and since the Treaty has come into effect have been in the Bay each year— In 1874 during the month of July I fished in shore to some extent may have taken from 150 to 200 barrels out of 700 my whole catch for that trip. In 1875 fished near the Magdalen Islands and caught very few inshore—Out of my last three trips in which my whole catch was 1900 barrells I caught not more than 200 barrels inshore—Most of the fish taken inshore are caught by the Canadians from small boats going out from the shore and returning each day with their fish. They Can use with profit this fishery where in many cases our large fishing vessels could not go. This inshore fishery is f comparatively little value to us, We would be much better off without this right and with the old duty of $2 per barrel on fish imported from Canada—The Bay fishery has been steadily decreasing from year to year, last year of all the vessels from Gloucester engaged in the Mackerel fishery nearly four hundred in all only about 50 sail were in the Bay at any time. This is Caused by the increase in value of the seine fishery on the coast of the United States, in which most of the other vessels were engaged. This Seine fishery is much more valuable and profitable than the fishing in the Bay with lines, the vessels make shorter trips. The seine fishery has been tried to some extent in the Bay but was not profitable, the bottom is too rough and the water too shoal— The fish in the Bay have diminished in number and deteriorated in Quality very much within the last ten years. for instance last year the vessels did not average more than 120 barrels each, while the best catch was only 380 barrels, in 1874 my vessel caught 700 barrels and the whole fleet averaged, as much as 300 barrels— Clams and pogies are the principal bait for mackerel, pogies are only taken on the coast of the United States and the Canadians buy it from us to a great extent, I have sold them myself as much as ten barrels each year—The right to land &c as granted by the Treaty used to be of Some value in the old times when the Reciprocity Treaty was in 3100 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. forge, it was the custom then to tranship the fish and send them back by freighters, but this is not done now each vessel carries back its own catch to Gloucester—American vessels purchase supplies from the Canadians to a great extent, furnishing supplies and shipping on board our vessels as hands for a fishing trip are the principal occupations of the people at Canso. Last year I spent $50.00 for supplies there, and have probably averaged that amount each year—Canadians can prose- cute the fisheries in their waters with much less expense than we can, they can build their vessels one-third cheaper, their crews go for less, in all Canadian vessels the skippers per centage is assessed among the crew, while here it is paid by the owners—Now that the American market is thrown open to them, they can undersell our fishermen and reduce their profits. Under the old tariff before the Treaty, their share of the trips has been much less valuable— & JOHN. E. G.ORMAN COMMON WEALTH OF MASSA CEIUSETTS ESSEX SS GLOUCESTER Feby 2d 1876 Then personally appeared the above named John Gorman to me known and made oath that all the foregoing statements by him Sub- scribed are true upon his own knowledge and belief— (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 39. I Nicholas Warren of Gloucester in the County of Essex and Com- monwealth of Massachusetts being duly sworn do depose and say that I have been engaged in the cod and mackerel fisheries for the last seven- teen years have been in the Bay the last six years—I have fished very little inshore as I could not do so well there as further out—In our fish- ing vessels we cannot follow the mackerel so well as the Canadians who in their small boats come out from the shore—Last Summer there were very few fish in the Bay, this has been so for the last few years and the vessels engaged in fishing off the American coast have made much bet- ter fares than those which went to the Bay—Last season there were not more than forty Gloucester vessels in the Bay out of a fleet of four hun- dred, while ten years ago there would be as many as three hundred from Gloucester alone in the Bay at one time, This was before the Seine fish- ery on our own coast became so valuable—I have known of Seine fishing being tried in Canadian waters, but it has been unsuccessful the water was shallow and the rough bottom tore their nets—I have never sold any bait to the Canadians but have known of its being done to a great extent, the bait used by us for mackerel is the menhaden which is not found in Canadian waters and they have to use herring which is poor and not nearly so good for the purpose—I have never repacked and shipped any fish home by steamer and I do not consider the clause in the treaty permitting this of any value, ten years ago it used to be done but not now Our trade is a great advantage to the Canadians as we purchase Supplies wood &c in great quantities, I have paid as much at $100.00 each year— The free clause in the Treaty is of great benefit to the Canadians and has lowered our prices and diminished our profits — Canadian vessels have come to this town and sold their fish green here as they had no market for them at home and the received much higher prices here — The Canadians can build their vessels much cheaper than we can and also they pay their crew much less a man can be hired in the Provinces AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3101 for from $50 to $75 a trip, while we pay from $100 to $200 per man, thus they can under sell and make a profit where we could not live — NICHOLAS WARREN COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS ESSEX SS GLOUCESTER Jany 26th 1876 Then personally appeared the abovenamed Nicholas Warren to me known and made oath that all the foregoing statements subscribed by him are true as far they depend upon his own knowledge and as far as they depend upon information and belief he believes them to be true Before me— <> (Seal) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public. No. 40. I Henry Hardy of Gloucester in the County of Essex and Common- wealth of Massachusetts, being duly sworn do depose and say that I have been engaged in the fishery business for twenty one years, for last seventeen years master of a vessel—Since 1872 have been in the Bay each year, very few fish were caught inshore not one eighth portion of the whole catch. This was in 1873 & 1874 last year did not fish inshore as I did better outside—My principal catch has always been about the Magdalen Islands—Last year there were about 125 vessels in the Bay Of which ºperhaps 40 were from Gloucester. All most all the inshore bay fishery is"carried on by the Canadians in small boats from the shore, so that they can use this fishery with profit where we could not, as they can follow the fish closer to the shore—Fewer and fewer vessels go to the Bay each season as they can make more profit seine fishing on the American coast I have tried to use a seine for mackerel in the Bay but I had no luck, the fish would not school there as the do in our waters and the water in many places is too shoal to permit of its being used to any advantage—I think the free importation clause in the Treaty of great advantage to the Canadians, as they can carry on the business so much cheaper than we can, There is a rebate of duty on all articles bought by fishermen for their business and they can build boats and hire men much cheaper—Many men have gone from here to the Provinces, where they can buy a boat for $50 and by going out from the shore catch there fish and carry them back at night, making more money than by going on fishing trips. Large Canadian fishing Vessels have come to Gloucester and sold their fish there green—Canadians use as bait herring which they catch in their own waters but this is a poor bait—and when they can they procure menhaden bait from us—Ameri- can vessels spend a great deal of money for supplies &c in Canada. I in one summer paid out $2000.00 for refitting The merchants at Canso complain and say that they have lost a great deal of money by the dim- inution of business caused by our vessels not coming to the bay as they used to—The only benefit under the treaty we receive is the right to enter harbors &c. without molestation, we were troubled in every way and driven away from the harbors on the ground that we were “pre- paring to fish.” I have been chased several times by cutters when I was more than seven miles away from the land and once in “Pirates Barbor.” Canso I was seized as a prize and my sails stripped off because I could not get away within the given time allowed me—All We Want from the Canadians are the rights in their harbors which are allowed to all other vessels except American fishing-vessels— HENRY BIARDY 3102 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ESSX SS * GLOUCESTER Jam 25th 1876 Then personally appeared the abovenamed Eſenry Hardy and made. oath that all the foregoing statements by him subscribed are true as far as they depend upon his own knowledge and as far as they depend upon information and belief he believes them to be true— —before me— (Seal.) ** DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 41. I John E Saunders of Gloucester in the county of Essex and Com- monwealth of Massachusetts being duly sworn do depose and say that I am forty seven years old and have been engaged in fishing since I was a boy for the last twenty five years I have been captain of a vessel I Have been in the Bay of St Lawrence every year from July to November. Since 1872 I have used the inshore fisheries very little, in all have not taken more than five barrels inshore—I can always do much better off shore —Last year there were very few Gloucester vessels in the Bay not more than forty, most of the others were engaged in Seine fishing off our own coast which is very valuable and productive—The Bay catch has not been near So heavy for the last five years as before and for this reason we send fewer vessels each year to the Bay. The seine fishery has been tried in the Bay but has been unsuccessful the water is shallow and the Imackerel do not school as they do off our coast—Canadians import men- haden bait from the United States to some extent, the menhaden is not found north of Cape Sable, fresh herring is used by Canadians some- what but it is an inferior sort of bait and they much prefer menhaden when they can get it. I never have used the right under the treaty to land and repack fish &c. I do not consider it of any value—I have pur- chased supplies and refitted in Canadian ports, several times spent $250 —in one season and once paid $700—for refitting my vessel Americans are charged very high prices for every thing purchased—They can build their vessels much cheaper and by paying their crews much less they can carry on the business at much less cost and as by the treaty they can send their fish here free, they are enabled to make a profit where Our fishermen could not live— -. I consider the treaty of much benefit to the Canadians and of little value to us; The only use to us, is that we are allowed to buy pro- visions &c. without hinderance, this right was always ours, but we were prevented and driven away on the ground that it was preparing to fish— JOHN E. SAUNDERS COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ESSEX SS GLOUCESTER Jan 26th 1876 Then personally appeared the above named John Saunders to me known and made oath that all the foregoing statements subscribed by him are true as far as they depend upon his own knowledge and as far as they depend upon information and belief he believes them to be true— before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW º Notary Public Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3103 No. 42. I Richard Hannan of Gloucester in the County of Essex and Com- monwealth of Massachusetts being duly sworn do depose and say that I am forty three years old, have been on fishing trips ever since I was a boy, for the last eighteen years master of a vessell. Most every year from July to November have been mackerel fishing sometimes all the year—For the last ten years have fished principally around the Magda- len Islands I have fished in the Bay both within and without three mile limit but have caught most fish offshore—Since 1872 I have used the inshore fisheries to Some extent. The catch inshore seemed much poorer . than when I fished before inshore during the Reciprocity Treaty—The Bay fishery has been very poor for last five years, the fish are few and poor, the price of Bay mackerel has been about $5 less than the Ameri- can mackerel—only few Gloucester vessels from forty to fifty were in the Bay last year, ten years ago all the vessels fished there but by rea- son of the fewness of the fish they have left it and now fish on the American shores with a Seine—I have seen vessels in the Bay fishing with seines but they had no luck and tore or lost their Seines—I have sold menhaden bait to the Canadians a few barrels each year, they im- port a great deal of this bait from the United States—now by the Treaty they can come here and catch this bait themselves, to my own knowl- edge there have been two or three vessels here from Yarmouth or Argyle which came to catch pogies for use in the Bay—I have bought cod bait. salt lines &c. from the Canadians have paid $125—gold for codbait and as much as $500 for refitting my vessel in one summer—I have under the clause of the treaty, landed mackerel transhipped it and sent them home by steamer, but there is not any gain or benefit procured by doing so, the expense is much greater than if I had taken the fish home in my own vessel I consider the right of the Canadians to send their fish in free of duty and sell them in the United States worth a great deal more to them, than anything we shall gain by the treaty I have known Cana- dian vessels to land their small fish at home where there is a market for them, and then taking the larger ones to the United States and selling them there to more advantage—Canadians can use the inshore fishery to much more advantage than we can, they go out in small boats from the shore and can fish near shore where our vessel cannot go—Prices of mackerel have been much lower during the past year than before and all our fishermen have lost money—The only benefit of the treaty to us is the use of the harbors without molestation and being permitted to . buy provisions &c the inshore fisheries we cannot use to any profit— The right to send in fish free of duty is of much more value to the Canadians than any rights we have received or will receive under the treaty ; this is my experience of four years under this and six under the Old Treaty— s RICHARD EIANNAN COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS. IESSEX SS— GLoucestER, Jan 28th 1876 Then personally appeared before me the abovenamed Richard Hanna to me known and made oath that all the foregoing statements by him subscribed are true as far as they depend upon his own knowledge and as far as they depend upon information and belief he believes them to be true—before me— (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Pullic 3104 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. - - No. 43. This is to certify, That the undersigned Stephen B. Morey have been engaged in the fishing business, for the past thirty years, at Deer Isle, and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: Namely since 1871 No. of Vessels employed five (5) 11 men to each Vessel No. of Trips made six trips yearly each year 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . ()() 2 00 00 00 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 Lawrence . . . . . * * * * . . . . . 00. 420 00 00 00 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands - None caught on Bradly Orphan & Magdalenes Average value of Vessels each - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . $3500 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2400 Average value of Insurance . . . . . . . . 8 per cent on vessel & outfits yearly Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo . . . . $34 Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . 2208 to each Captain yearly Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore . . . .23008 Number of Vessels lost Value of Vessels lost, including outfits Value of Fish lost Number of lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. * 85 cts Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, Salting, &c., per bbl . . ----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... $2.20 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. nothing Total value of Mackerel do - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nothing Average market value of American Shore Mackerel. .* Nº § Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $11.50 $8 $5.50 Average earnings of the Operative fisherman per year - - - - - - - - - - - $2.20 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and Various "º: § 12005 Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $400 . A mount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish - Grand Western Lahave Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Maekerel * . Cape Eſenry to Anticosta Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking Actual value of Mackerel in the water before taken Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries Early in going fishing I used the waters of the Bay of St Lawrence— Later in life in the same waters I used to go mackereling and made some fair Trips with the Jig. Since 1867 I have abandoned the fisheries of the Bay of St Lawrence only Sending there in 1873 and my vessels have been engaged in Fishing with trawls—and Seining mackerel on Our Shore. So far as American fishermen are concerned our vessels have given up the , Bay of St Lawrence—and regard it as an entire failure * S. B. MOREY AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3105 Sworn and subscribed to before me, this eighth day of June 1877 - TELOMAS WARREN Justice of the Peace STATE OF MAINE g COUNTY OF HANCOCK STATE OF MAINE. HANCOCK, Ss. I, Hutson B. Saunders, Clerk of the Supreme Judicial Courts, in said County, certify that Thomas Warren Esquire is and was at the date of his Certificate an acting Justice of the Peace, in and for said County, duly commissioned and qualified to act as such, and that the signature to the paper annexed, purporting to be his, is genuine, and that he is duly authorized and empowered, by the laws of said State, to take ac- • knowledgment of Deeds, Assignments, and Powers of Attorney, and to administer oaths. In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my Hand and affixed the Seal of the Supreme Judicial Court, for said State, this eighth day of June in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy- SC Vell. * (Seal.) HUTSON B SAUNDERS Clerk. No. 44. This is to certify, That the undersigned Seth and C. H. S. Webb have been engaged in the fishing business, for the past Ten years, at Deer Isle, Maine, and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: viz. since 1871 No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 15 men to each vessel No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - five trips each year - 1871, 1872 1873 1874. 1875 1876 No. of trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . 3 2 () () () () No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. 1871-1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 Lawrence. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - • * } 754. 854. () () 0 () No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalen Islands . . . . . . . . . . was m º sº ºn tº me gº ºr t as ºr sº sº dº * all caught a Magdalens Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4000. Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $3000. Average Value of Insurance. - - - - - - . . . . 10% on vessel & outfits yearly Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo... $37.50 Average value of Commissions, &e . . . . . . -s ºr us º ºs ºs & ºf sº tº e s tº es e º ºr * * * * 4 trips yearly. Each Vessel No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence ſº 1872–1 trip 1873–1 trip 1874—2 trips 1875–1 trip No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence 93 Bls — 944 – 505, 80 Bls No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • M is sº se - sº as a tº º ºr “e º sº. ºº e as ss is a s sº e NOne Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4000, Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 each trip Average value of Insurance . . . . 200 9 per cts on Vessell & Outfitts Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. forty Dollars Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . Three hundred Dollars Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore & fifteen Thousand Dols Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * = ºn tº gº as tº º ºs º gº ºr tº sº . . . . None Value of Vessels lost, including outfits Value of Fish lost g |Number of Lives lost Total value of Fsh taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per cwt- (50) fifty cents Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Three Dollars Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores.... None Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - * - gº ºi º º º { % Average market value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . . s. Ten Dollars $16–$12–$8 $11–$7–$5 Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seven Dollars Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year Two hundred Dollars Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies Bach year Eight hundred Dollars Amount paid to British fishermen - for herring . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * & 4 Five { % { % Amount paid to British fishermen as wages 8 men forty Dollars per month Amount paid in British ports for repairs...Twenty one hundred Dollars Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish .* Western Bank. Grand Bank. Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - Gulf of St Lawrence to cape May Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . { % Eacts as to changes in location and mode of conducting Americºn fish- €I’ICS Lines & Trawls & Eſand lines are used for taking fish AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 31.17 Our vessells are mostly confined to Ocean Banks for Fish. We do not take any fish in British waters. the Bay St. Lawrence fisheries have proved a falier in our experiance. Vessells sent their for the past five years have not paid their expenses and to continue the Business in that Direction would prove Ruinous. GEO DENNIS GEORGE TUCEQEB Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 31st day of May 1877 (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 53. - This is to certify, that the undersigned, Joseph O. Procter has been engaged in the fishing business for the past. Thirty years, at Gloucester, Mass. and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in ef- fect, my vessels have been employed as follows: - No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thirteen No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six yearly to each vessel—78 1872 73 74 75 76 No. of Trips to Bay of St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . ... 5 13 11 5 1 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence 7,486 Bbls in 5 years or 211 Bbls per trip on the average. No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands . . . . . . . . . .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 750 A Veráge Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . $3.500.00 yearly to each vessel Average value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . $300.00 yearly to each vessel Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo $35, pr month Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . $200.00 prºvessel per year Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. $30,000,00 Number of vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Three Value of Vessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . Fifteen thousand dollars Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Four thousand dollars Number of Lives lost . . . . . . * * > -e ºs = < * * * * * * * * * ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ... Fifteen Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. from 50 to $1.00. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, Salting, &c., per bl. ----------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Two dollars Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores... None Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . $6,850, delivered at Gloucester Average market value of American Shore Mackerel º No. 1, $16. No. 2=$12. No. 3–$8.00 Average market value of Bay Mackerel No. 1–$12. No. 2 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year - Three hundred dollars Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies $1,800.—yearly 8. No. 3—$6.— Amount paid to British fishermen for herring........ $900 each Season Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Georges, Grand, Querau, St Peters and other Banks off Shore 3.118 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel From Cape Henry to Cape Northe. Cape Breton Actual value of Fish in the water, be No value. Costs all they - fore taking w & Actual value of Mackerel in the water, tº: º: º: and prep are before taken Tacts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries - Since the year 1870 the number of vessels using the Bay of St Law- rence for Mackerel catching has been gradually reduced from about 500 to less than 60 vessels from the United States; the Mackerel being poor and in small quantity; while on our Shores Mack'I have been more plenty, of better quality, and a large fleet engaged from April 25th to Nov. 10th. All the Wessels on our Shore now use the Seine, and none, the hook and line as formerly. Seining has not been successfully car- ried on in the Bay of St Lawrence, the shoalness of the water and the unevenness of the bottom, where the few Mack'l there tend; has made every voyage unsuccessful, and caused an abandonment of the business. There will probably be less Vessels in the Bay this Season than any season during the last Forty. Our Cod fisheries are deep Sea fisheries, and outside of all local jurisdiction. \ JOSEPH O. PROOTER, Sworn and subscribed to before me, this fifth day of June 1877 (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 54. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Samuel Haskell have been engaged in the fishing business for the past fifteen years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • gº as ºr ºt tº dº º gº . Six. No. of Trips made... Seven & 8 trips yearly to each Wessel, total 5 yrs 223 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. .4 2 3 () () total 9 No. Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence 1872 1873 1874 . 1100 bls 420 bls 383 bls total 3 yrs 1903 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 125 Bbls Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . five thousand Dollars. Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . $2700 to each vessel yearly Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200 each vessel yearly Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. t - Captain $70 Crews $30 each Average Value of Commission, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200 each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore - - $12000 yearly Number of Vessels lost. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * is is ſº tº as is ºf an $6500 Value of fish lost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $600 Number of lives lost. --- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ten Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CWt. {Dne Dollar AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3119 Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, Splitting, Salting, &c.; per bbl -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $2,50 cts Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . None Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1100 delivered at Gloucester Average market value of American Shore Mackerel f No 1. $16 No. 2, $12, No 3 $8 Average market value of Bay Mackerel No. 1 $12 No 2, $8 No 3, $6 I sold for $10,85 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . $275 at my place Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies $200 each vessel yearly. total $1200 yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . $600 each year Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * * None Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Grand, Western, La, have, Georges Banks. Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel IFrom Cape May to Eastport & Bay St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken. . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’I6S : Eſave sent no vessels into the Bay of St Lawrence the last two years, the Bay, fishing does not pay the expenses. The last years I had vessels there in 73 & 74 they did not pay for their outfits The Mack- erel are poor worth $d less than shore mackerel it is a bad place to use a Seine a long time is required for a trip and to pursue the Bay fishery, and that alone, would fail any firm in Gloucester. It is entirely & prac- tically useless to us as a fishery. The Halibut and cod fishery are en- tirely Bank fisheries owing no allegience to any Government * SAML HASEQELL Sworn and subscribed to before me, this thirty first day of May 1877 (Seal.) - DAVID W. LOW Notary Public. No. 55. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Joseph Priend have been engaged in the fishing business for the past 40 years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - ... 12 men each vessell No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • *, * * * * * * * * 6 to each Vessell 3. 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 No. of trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 I () () 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay of St. Lawrence - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . .1500 1200 220 0 () INo. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdelene Islands. -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº s tº is sº sº * about one-tenth Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • - - - - - - - 6000, each - Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . .2000, do yearly Average value of Insurance - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . 9 & on vessels & OutfittS Average value of Captains' and crews' time, viz., wages per mo - .35 each Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 each vessell 3120 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore... $20000 Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . one in Bay. St. Lawrence Value of vessels lost, including outfits - . . . . . . . . . . . ., - - - - - - - e = * * * ... 7000 Value of Fish lost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Il OI) e. Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per cwt. .50 Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ** * * * * * * * * * * * ~ * * * * ſº dº 1.50 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores . . . . none Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600, - Nos 1 2 3 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . . . . . 16, 12, 8, - t ' Nos 1 2 3 Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. 7. 5. Average earnings of the Operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . . . $225. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies -------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * e 900.00 A mount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . 7000.00 yearly Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages . . . . . . . . . . . . 200.00 dO Amount paid in British ports for repairs Elocations frequented by American vessels for Fish - - Grand Banks & Georges Locations frequented by American vessels for mackerel from Cape May to Gulf of St. Law. Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing. Actual value of mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . . . do Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- ©I’lèS - Years ago we sent meny, vessels to the Bay, of, St Lawrence for Mackerél but for, the last five years the business has proved so unprofit- able we cannot pursue it my, vessels are now confined to the Ocean banks and our own shores intirely our shore Mackerel being much, Superior in quality and being taken with Seins realize a larger profit then any, other Mackerel fishery my, vessels enter British waters only, for. Bait suplies and Herring for, which I, pay, cash to the Inhabitants - JOSEPEI FRIEND Sworn and subscribed to before me, this first day of June 1877 (Seal.) | - DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 56. r This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Sam- uel Lane & Bro have been engaged in the fishing business for the past thirteen years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . Six No. of Trips made. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 252 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . o- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2500 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- including Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * B ºr a • * * * * * * * * * * * * * 100 A Verage value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . to a sa e s m ºn a s "a sº gº º tº . . . . . $4000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c,. . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . $800 Average value of Insurance......... g an e º me • * * * * * * * s a • * * * * . . . . . . $3500 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3121 Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . . . . $45 Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $175 Average value of . Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. $27000 Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . * * * * * * * * > * * * * * Lº dº is is a $8700 Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IłOIle. Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * tº tº rºs - - - -12 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. ". CWt . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. *. bbl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * * ... a s m = a s º is tº ºr * * * * * e s tº 4° ºf 3 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . . In OI! Gº Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *:: *. º. is ſº be tº & ºt $300 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel. . . . . . . ..e. n a • * * * * $12 Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7 per Bbl. Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . $400 per man. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies . . . . . . . . . ... * * *- sº as tº dº ſº dº sº a ºn tº as a tº dº º ºs e as as a s & a wº tº as ſº se ºf s ºn tº a $950 per Trip. Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4300 Amount paid to British fishermen as wages $8750 for mackl. caugh Bay St. Lwrence. Amount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2500 Locations frequented by American vessels for fish none in Bay of St. Lawrence. Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - - P. E. Island—Magdalene Is—C. B. Is. Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . . . . . . no value. Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . no value. Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €TI eS - Before the year 1871 the Bay of St. Lawrence was some benefit to Gloucester Mackerel Fishermen, but since then the mackl have been more plenty on the American Coast, therefore the Glou mackerel Ves- Sels have been growing less in no every year that formerly engaged in the Bay of St. Lawrence mackerel fishing and have tended the Amer- ican coast with Seines for mackerel. We consider Fishing in the Bay of St. Lawrence of no value. SAML LANE SAML LANE & BRO §"ºp Sworn and subscribed to before me, this first day of June 1877 (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public NO. 57. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of George Steele have been engaged in the fishing business for the past 25 years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . .... • e e s - p = • a sº tº sº dº tº ſº tº sº e º p ºr e º us e average nine No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 in 6 year No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 “ ( 4. No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . about 5000 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OD16 196 F. g gº 3122 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - $6500. Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .800. each trip Average value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9% on value vessel & outfit Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . . $40. Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $350. each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. $28000. Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . about $45000. Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. ------------ * * * * * * * * * * 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * *s as a s a ºn as * * * * ~ * * * * * 50 CentS Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * $1.00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . nothing. Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . - ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ~ * = 46 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . $16 $12 $8 Average market Value of Bay Mackerel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $11. $6. $4. Average earnings of the Operative fishermen per year . . . . . . . . . . $250. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and Various Sup- plies - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $200. per vessel yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages . . . . $50. per vessel yearly Amount paid in British ports for repairs. $750. per year for past 6 years Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish - Georges, Browns, Le Have & Grand Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel from Cape May to Gulf St. Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the Water, before taking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken. . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €T16S l IHand lining has about given way to Trawls and Seines. The Bay of St. Lawrence fishing for Mackerel has not proved profitable; it has been gradually falling off for several years and vessels there do not now pay expenses. One vessel there last year for 3 mos with 16 men only packed out 69 Barrels. Our vessels pursue the deep water fishing on the Banks bordering the Gulf Stream and outside the jurisdiction of any nation. - GEORGE STEELE. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this second day of June 1877 (Seal.) 1. DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 58. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Cun- ningham & Thompson have been engaged in the fishing business for the past six years at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: - No. Of vessels employed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ten, (10) No. of Trips made :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . Seven yearly to each Vessel No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ten from 1870 to 1874 AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 3123 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence - Q. Three thousand, $3,000 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 Bbls Average value of Vessels each . . . . . tº s 4 x * * * * * * * * * is sº e º ºr a º º ºs º º ſº & A. $6,500 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. $1,000 for Bay trip. Average, $3,000 yearly Average value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . ... . . .9 per ct on Vessel & Outfits Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . . . $40 Average value of Commissions, &c. * 4 pret on gross stock about $200 each vessel. Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, in- cluding expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. Appurtanences $22,000 Labor $5000 per Annum Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Three. Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . •. º. º. as sº º º a ºs º ºs º & $18,000 Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7,000 Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fifteen Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . 75 cts Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, sº per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * 1,00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores .... None Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . '• - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . $400 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel $15 No. 1 $12 No 2 $8 No 3 Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . $11 No 1 $7 No 2 $5 No 3 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year . . . . . . . . . . . $250. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $250 to each vessel. Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . $300 yearly Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . . . . . $150 per year. Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1000 yearly Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Western, Georges, and Grand Bank Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel | Long Island to Newfoundland Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No value Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken. . . . . . . . . . No Value IFacts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €TI eS We have had no Vessels in the Bay of St. Lawrence since 1874 and at no time in the last 7 years have our vessels that went there paid their expenses, the privelege of fishing within three miles of British shores is of no Value whatever Over one half of our Fishermen are natives of the Dominion employed by our Capital in our vessels and deriving maintainence therefrom, We consider the privelege of our free markets vastly in excess of value of any concessions of shore fishing given by the Dominion SYLVESTER, CUNNING|HAM WILLIAM TEIOMPSON Sworn and subscribed to before me, this second day of June 1877 (Seal.) --- DAVID W. LOW Notary Public 3124 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION, NO. 59. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Dennis & Ayer have been engaged in the fishing business for the past twelve years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fourteen No. Of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eighty per year for all of the Vessels No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . & e Six Since 1871 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence e - Eighteen hundred Bbls No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six thousand dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . One thousand dollars Average Value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Five thousand dollars Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. Thirty dollars Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . four per cent. to Capt. of Vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Forty thousand dollars Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . Eight thousand dollars Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One thousand do Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . = • - - - - - a • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Twelve Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - One dollars Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * is e as e s is 2 a. º. a we e s a • * * * * Two dollars Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. ... None Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . *2 a e = w = sº e º 'º. 4 s * * * * * * * * * * * * * s w as tº e s None Average market value of American Shore Mackerel. . . . . . . Ten dollars Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . Eight dollars per Bbls Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year Two hundred & Seventy-five dollars. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies . . . . . . • * * * * * * * > * s Two hundred dollars per year for each vessel. Amount paid to British fishermen for herring - - One thousand dollars per Year Newfoundlan Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Amount paid in British ports for repairs. ... one thousand dollars 1873. Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish 1 Georges La Eſaven Western & Grand Bank’s Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Coast of the United States & Gulf St. Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . - - - - - - Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Eacts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €TIOS - Within last three years we have not had any Vessels engaged in Fishing in British Waters either for Cod or Mackeral. The Mackl fishing being done on the Coast of the United States from New Jersey to and along the Eastern Coast of Maine and those engaged in Cod Fishing on Georgies Western Le Have & Grand Banks not resort- ing to British Waters except to purchase Bait and occasionally for Ice. Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3125 The Gulf of St Lawrence Fishery is so improftable that we consider it an entire failure. JAMES S AYER. DENNIS & AYER JOHN G DENNIS - Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 31st day of May 1877 (Seal.) - DAVID W. LOW * i. - Notary Public No. 60. - This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of - - have been engaged in the fishing business for the past years, at - and that since the Washington |. so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as O110W S : No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Seven No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thirty five Yearly No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . TWO in 1873 none since No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... None Average Value of Wessels each. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5800, A Verage Value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $800, Average value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . sº º te e º ºs $4400, or about 9 per cent Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., Wages per Iſl O - - - - - 'e º a tº e ºs e s tº E we ºn e º ſº º tº º, º ºs e º ºr ºn e º tº ſº ºn tº we gº º $35, $200.00 each vessel Average value of Commissions, &c..4 per cent on Gross Stock to Skipper Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore... 818000. Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6400 Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Twelve Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº e s m e º 'º e s sº º 75 ct;S Tº value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, sº i. bl:- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1. Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. ... None Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . 'º, ºn tº as a º ºr a tº as ºs º is a gº º e ºv * * * * None Average market value of American Shore Mackerel $14. for ones $12, for twos $8, for threes Average market value of Bay Mackerel º, $11, for ones $8, for twos $6, for threes Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . . . $250, Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and Various Sup- plies. . . . . . . . . . . • --------------- , - * * * * * * * * ~ * * - - - - - - - - - $400, Yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $220, Yearly Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Gr. Bank La Have Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Cape May to Bay St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . Nothing 3126 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Eacts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’16S t * The Bay of St Lawrence fishery has proved a failure in my experi- ence my vessels not having paid their bills or expenses consequently I now confine my vessels to our owu Shores for Mackerel, and the Ocean Banks for fish My vessels do not enter British Waters except for Bait or supplies % WM. C. WONSON - Sworn and subscribed to before me, this thirty first day of May 1877 (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 61. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of have been engaged in the fishing business for the past years, at and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5) Five No. Of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . ... .231 Codfish trips. 17 mackerel Trips No. Of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - º gº ºr dº º ºs º ºs º ºs (11) Eleven No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2301 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Most caught off Magdalenes. Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . ºn e s = ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * $6,000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.000 Average Value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 on Vessel & Outfits. Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. $40 Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200 each Sch’r. Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. $18,000 Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1) one Value of Vessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7.000 Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $500 Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . * ... s. m. we as s as it as e º & 9 & is sº tº dº nº e º ºn tº s sº in Il OD10 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c per cwt. - 75 G Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * @ e º º ºs º ºr tº s sº wº me e º sº e º ſe e º ſº, tº tº as º. ºn tº sº e = e º ºs e s sº tº $2.00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores no fish Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $500. Average market value of American Shore Mackerel $16 No 1's $12 no 2's $8 no 3 Average market value of Bay Mackerel $11 75 no 1 $7.50 no 2 $5.50 no 3S Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . $200– Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies $100—yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Grand Bank—Georges Bank— Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Cape May & Gulf St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3127 Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before takerſ . . . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €TIOS Have withdrawn vessels from Bay on acc of being unprofitable— business to pursue. & Our codfishing is pursued on Ocean Banks within no national Juris- diction Our vessels do not go in British water except to purchase Bait & Supplies - EPES SAYWARD JR, GEO SAY WARD Sworn and subscribed to before me, this thirty first day of May 1877 (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW . - Notary Public No. 62. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Daniel Sayward have been engaged in the fishing business for the past thirteen years, at Gloucester, and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . =º gº is a re ºn tº as e º us tº & 7 to 5 Seven to five No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... - . 188 One hundred eighty-eight No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Twelve in five years. No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2398. , No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands --- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 Average value of Vessels each . . . . .... s is we e s = e . . . . . s. 75 per hundred Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, Salting, &c., per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , sº e º ºs e s a tº a , a. as e s e º e s = • * * * * * * * $1.50 per bbl. Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . . . . 0 Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 A Verage market value of American Shore Mackerel No. 1 $16. No. 2 $12. No 3 $8. Average market value of Bay Mackerel No. 1 $12. No. 2 $8. No. 3 $6. Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . . $225. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ---------------------. . . . . $100, yearly A mount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to Rritish fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs - Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish . . . . . . Grand, West- ern and George's Banks 3128 A:WARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. “. Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel . . . . . . American Shores & Bay St. Lawrence • . Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * () Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . . .‘. . . 0 Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries My vessels have not paid their expenses for the last five years while employed in taking mackerel at the Bay of St. Lawrence. The quality of the mackerel being poor, and the length of the trips making them. So expensive that I cannot pursue this business to advantage. All of my codfishing business is pursued out on the ocean banks out- side of the jurisdiction of any nation. Entering. British waters only for the purchase of bait and Supplies. DANIEL SAYWARD Sworn and subscribed to before me, this thirty first day of May 1877 (Seal.) - DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 63. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of William IParsons 2d & Co have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Thirty years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * º ºs º gº e º ºs º ºs e º sº e º ºs e ∈ Fourteen No. of Trips made... Five trips yearly each vessel, Total, 90 trips per year t 1871. 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence... 3 3 4 2 0 () - Total 6 years 12 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . Two thousand No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 Bbls Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Five thousand Dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . $2800 yearly to each vessel Average Value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $300 yearly to each vessel Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . . . $35 Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200 each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Twenty thousand Dollars, yearly Number of vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One Value of vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . Seven thousand Dollars Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . --- . . . TWO thousand “ Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sº sº e º º ºs º gº ºn e s - sº me tº e s gº º 'º ºf fourteen Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CW't. . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - sº e º sº e 75 CtS Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, Salting, &c., per bbl. . . . . . . . . . . --------------. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $2,00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . None Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2500 in Gloucester Market Average market value of American Shore Mackerel We sold for $15 $10 $8 Average market value of Bay Mackerel We sold for No 1 $10 No 2 #8 No 3 $6 Average earnings of the Operative fishermen per year $200 at one place AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3129 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies 200 each Vessel. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2800 yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,000 yearly Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . five Hundred Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish * Georges Grand Western La Have Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel from Long Island to Newfoundland Actual value of Fish in the Water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water before taken. . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries - - For the past eight years fishing in British waters has been a total failure We have tried it thoroughly & completely—and our vessels sent to the Bay have not paid their expenses. American fishermen would have been much better off never to have gone into those waters Seining has superseded the Hook & line fishing for Mackerel, the best mackerel are off Our Own Coasts nearer our markets, our vessels make short trips, the mackerel are in better condition, We have sent no ves- sels in the Bay the last two years, No Codfish are taken by our vessels inside of British limits - THOMAS L. PARSONS EBEN PARSONS 2d GEORGE PARSONS Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 31st day of May 1877. DAVID W. LOW (Seal.) Notary Public No. 64. | This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Won- Son & Co., have been engaged in the fishing business for the past twen- ty five years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . - us tº ºr e º tº ºn tº ºn tº & ºr ºne º ºs º º sº º nº º sº y Ten (10) No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . five each vessel yearly No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 2, 2, 2, 2, 1, - 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence 350, 400, 325, 300, 150 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands * Mackerel caught at the Magdelens Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . $3000 yearly each vessel Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . 9 per cent on Vessel & Outfits Average value of Captains' and Crews’ time, viz., wages per mo. . . $40 Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore $20,000 yearly Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - • * x * * * * * * * * • - - - - None Value of Wessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº º ºs tº as º ºs º 'º & None Value of Fish lost - *A Number of Lives lost 3130 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * 75 ct;S Tº Value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, sº per * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * us as a s s as se e a e º e s sº s e e s m e s et - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $1.00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. None Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None. Average market Value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . . . 16 10 8 Average market Value of Bay Mackerel... . . . . . . . . tº ºr as as ºr sº se 11 8 6 , A Verage earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . $250 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and Various supplies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 each vessel yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring $600 to $800 for 4 vessels each yearly A mount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish f Grand Bank & Georges Locations frequented by American vessels Cape May to Bay St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €1216S Our vessels have been Cod fishing on the Banks & Mackereling mostly off our own shores, The Bay of St Lawrence fishery has constantly grown poorer Our vessels did not pay their expenses shall send no vessels there this year Our own Shore Mackerel are worth a third more than Bay Mackerel, We are using Seines where we formerly used Hooks & lines, The Cod fishery is pursued on the Banks bordering on the Gulf Stream many miles from any shores and within no National jurisdiction WONSON BROTHERS Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 31st day of May 1877. W. S. WONSON (Seal.) - S G. WONSON JR, DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 65. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Geo Norwood & Son have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Fifteen years, at Gloucester Mass. and that since the Washington Treaty, so called. has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as fol- lows: No. of Vessels employed........ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - •w a s sº e s tº * * * * Seven No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . v e a e s tº ſº º e s = w a dº ºn a s & sº me a * - - - - - - - . . . Forty No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , Sixteen since 1871 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence Thirty-Six Hundred Barrels No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalen Islands. - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . --------- - - - - - - - - - : None Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six Thousand dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . One Thousand dollars Average value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . tº gº tº ºr ºs e º sº tº Five Thousand dollars AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 313. Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo - * Thirty dollars Average value of Commissions, &c.. four per cent. to Captain of Vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors, and labor on shore - Twenty thousand dollars Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. g Value of Fish lost. Number of lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * *s ºr a Four Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - One dollar Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ºn sº tº ſº º ºs º º ºs º º ºs º - ºr , - as ºf tº º & ºr gº º ºs ºf Two dollars Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores...Nothing Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Average market value of American Shore Mackerel. Ten dollars per Barrel Average market value of Bay Mackerel. . . . . . . . Eight dollars per barrel Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year Two hundred & fifty dollars Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies Two hundred dollars per year for each Wessel Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . . . • * * * ºr nº º º gº º ve & None Amount paid in British ports for repairs... Four hundred dollars Since 1871 Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Georges, Grand, Western, & La Have, Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel & Coast of United States & Gulf St. Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water before taking . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’léS. - We have not had any Vessels engaged in British Waters fishing since 1873 GEO NORWOOD FREDERIC NORWOOD Sworn and subscribed to before me, this thirty first day of May 1877 (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 66. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Leon- ard Walen have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Ten years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Four No. of Trips made .... Six trips yearly each vessel, Total, 24 each year No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . • - - - - - - - - - - - - - lsº lsº No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . 900 Barrels No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands . . . . . . • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * r * * * * * * None Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * ºn $7,500 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c - $900 for Bay trip. ($3000 each vessel ye 3132 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION, Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 each vessel yearly Averege value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo . . . . $35 Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. $11,000 Number of vessels lost . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - s - - - - - - - - - - - - - Three Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $21,000 Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $4,000 Number of Lives lost. . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Twenty six Total value of fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. pe, CWt: - 1,00 Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, Salting, &c., per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * , º º ºs e º ºs º ºs º ºs e º sº tº º ºs º ºr dº me tº -v º ºs s m e º sº sº tº x s m ºf e ... $2,00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. ... None Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Average market value of American shore mackerel No 1 $16 No 2, $12, No. 3, $8 Average market value Bay Mackerel I sold for No 1 $12, No 2, $8 No 3 $6, Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year.. $300 per year Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Supplies $2,300 Yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Amount paid to British fishermen as wages . . . . . a • * * * .* º sº, º is e º º ºs º None Amount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . . . . . . - * * * * * * * * * * * * $300 Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Grand Banks, Western, Georges, La Have Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel & Long Island Sound to Bay St Lawrence along shore Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I'léS The Fisheries and the mode of taking has changed much in ten years, formerly the shore fisheries were used when handlines and hooks were used now fish are taken on the Banks with trawls and Mackerel with seines, Our vessels are the best that can be built and go everywhere on the Ocean Banks for fish the fish are met and taken on the Banks nearest the Gulfstream as they come on the Banks to spawn, the Bay of St Lawrence is entirely unprofitable to American fishermen owing to the great expense of running the vessels and the poor quality and Quantity of fish & Mackerel there. - - LEONARD WALEN Sworn and subscribed to before me, this thirty first day of May 1877 (Seal.) DAVID W LOW - - Notary Public No. 67. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Rowe Jordan have been engaged in the fishing business for the past nine years, at Gloucester and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * † tº e º us s as a tº ten No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . eight each year by each vessel No. of Trips to Bay St Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . twenty one (21) No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay of St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . , 5462 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3,133 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ. ing Magdalene Islands . . . . . . . . , ſº e º e s a s is s ºf a ſe e º e s s tº a s a me • * * * * = & Il OD16) Average value of Vessels each - - fifty five hundred dollars at present time Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. One thousand “ Average value of Insurance - forty-eight hundred “ Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. - 3900 each vessel Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . to Capt. $350 each, Average value of Wharves, Fish houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. $30.800 Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . * @ me tº tº º ºs º ºs º º ºs º ºr six during five years Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454.25 Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7000 Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . twenty five (25) Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per cwt. 500 7800000 lbs $39,000 * Total Value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. $15.9 21000 bbls $31.500 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . none Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In OD 6) Average market value of American Shore Mackerel... thirteen dollars Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . ‘. . . . . . . . . ten dollars Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . . $275. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies $500 a year for each vesse Amount paid to British fishermen for herring l Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . $1500 Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish - Grand Georges Western & Lahave Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel e Coast of Maine & Mass Long Island & Bay St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . 4% Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting Amer- ican fisheries * T)uring the last four years the facilities for catching mackerl have in- creased so that it does not pay to go for them from our own shores as they can be taken in great abundance here & beside the chances of getting them in Bay of St Lawrence & adjacent waters seem to grow less, or at all events the chances for getting either Mackerel or Cod Fish is So Very uncertain that it is abandoned almost altogether, the vessels that pursued it did so at a heavy pecuniary loss last year & the year before— JOSEPEI ROWE. WILLIAMI H. JORDAN. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 31st day of May 1877 (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 68. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Harvey Knowlton Jr have been engaged in the fishing business for the past five 3134 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. years, at Gloucestor Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tWO, No. of Trips made. ----. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . six each vessel yearly No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . five in five years. No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . .725 Bbls. No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdelene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OIlê Average Value of Vessels each. -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7,000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . $3,000 each vessel yearly A Verage value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . - - - - - $300 “ 4% 44 Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . . . $40 Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . 250 each vessel yearly Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore... $12000 Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * : , s a º ... One Value of Vessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5,500. Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. G ºn tº dº sº ºn g º º g us * * * * * * * * =º sº gº º ºr Eleven Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CWt. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $1,00. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ** * * º ºs e º sº we dº tº dº º ºr $2,00. Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . . DOI) e. Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * 4 ºn tº a wº, sº as a tº tº * * * Il Orle Average market value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . . . $16 $12 $8 1. 2 3. - No 1 No 2 NO 3 Average market value of Bay Mackerel. . . . . . . .. . . . . . $12 $8 $6. Average earnings of the Operative fishermen per year. - - - - - - . . . . . . . 250 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies. ----------------------------- - - - - - - - - $250 each vessel yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring..... &t º ºr sº tº as ºn as ºr . . . . $1500. A mount paid to British fishermen as Wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,000 yearly A mount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OIl 6, Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Western Banks Grand Georges St Peters. Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel 4 & - American Shore Bay St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . *, *— & gº tº * nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Eacts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’LeS r * * a The Fisheries have changed from shore fishing to deep sea & Bank fishing, The mackerel fishery has changed from the hand line and hook. to use of Seines The Bay of St Lawrence fishery has decreased from 300 vessels yearky to 40 last year Not one of the vessels that went to the Bay of St Lawrence last year paid their expenses HARVEY ENOWLTON JR, Sworn and subscribed to before me, this thirty first day of May 1877. (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3135, No. 69. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Sid- ney Friend & Co have been engaged in the fishing business for the past 40 years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, SO. called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 13 No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sixty per year—for all the vessels No. of Trips to Bay St Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4) four (or whatever) No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065. No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ding Magdalene Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- In Oil 6 Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6000, each Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. about $700, per trip, or $2800, per year Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4500, each vessel Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., WageS ĐèT DO O. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - & iſ $35, per month. Average value of Commissions, &c 3 per ct on gross stock—to Skipper Average, value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore $12000, for Establishment & $4400, for labor making $16,400, inclusive Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On 6 Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = º º ºs º ºs •º ſº. $6000. Value of Fish lost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Iloile Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 75 etS Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &C., per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ------------- © Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shore... none Total Value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Average value of American Shore Mackerel º $15, for ones, $12, for twos $8, for threes. Average market value of Bay Mackerel $12, for ones; $8. for twos ; $6. for threes. Average earnings of the Operative fishermen per year. s. . . . . . . . $250, Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies. $200, each vessel. Amount paid to British fishermen for herring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . $300, Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $150, Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1.000; Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Gd Bank, Le Have, Bradlee, Orphan Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - f from Long Island to New Foundland. Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing. Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken. . . . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries - The Halibut & Cod fisheries are entirely deep-sea fisheries within no national jurisdiction. The mackerel fishery has largely changed from Hook & line fishing to seine fishing—the American shore mackerel. 3136 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. bringing one third more in price than the Bay-mackerel on account of Quality. , The Bay of St Lawrence fishery for mackerel has gradually deterio- rated intill we cannot send vessels there at any profit whatever. Those vessels we have sent the past seven years have not paid their expenses We consider the Bay Fishery a failure and worthless to American fisher- Iſl 6L]. *. SIDNEY FRIEND Sworn and subscribed to before me, this first day of June 1877 (Seal.) - DAVID W. LOW - Notary Public No. 70. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of David Low and Co have been engaged in the fishing business for the past twenty five years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: •, No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . fourteen No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six trips yearly each vessel 1872 1873 1874. 1875 1876 No. of Trips to Bay of St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . 5 5 2 1. 0 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 TellC6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1250 750 440 200 bls () No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands -- º not one tenth Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six thousand dollars each Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c Seventeen Hundred dollars value each vessel Average value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . nine per cent vessel & Outfits Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo - - Thirty dollars each Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . ... ...Two hundred dollars Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Thirty five thousand dollars Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * OD10 Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . five thousand dollars, Value of Fish lost - Number of Lives lost - Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. - - - fifty cts Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. . . . . . .* * * * * * * * * * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - two dollars Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . . none Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . * - - - - - - - - Six hundred dollars Average market value of American Shore Mackerel * - * Sixteen, twelve, & eight Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eleven, Seven five Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year - - Two hundred fifty Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies four thousand dollars yearly AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3.137 Amount paid to British fishermen for herring * Two thousand dollars yearly Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . five hundred dollars yearly Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish º Grand Bank & Georgies Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Cape May to Bay of St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries After first of July we used to send most of our vessels ten years ago—to Bay of St Lawrence—but of late years that fishing proveng of no Value, Our Vessels looseing money. We have confined them entirely to Our Own shores and the ocean banks, we send no vessels in the Brittish waters for fish or mackerel and only enter them for bait and Supplies for which we pay cash. we consider the Brittish inshore fisheries a Complete failure *.* BENJAMIN LOW Sworn and subscribed to before me, this first day of June 1877 (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 71. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Leigh- ton & Co have been engaged in the fishing business for the past nine years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . -- . . . . . . . . . . . Eighteen No. of Trips made . . Averaging about Eight Trips yearly to each vessel ... • 1872 T873 1874, 1875 1876 9 trips 14 Trips 4 Trips 1 Trip 1 Trip re & 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. 2851.4273 1341 309 134 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands - Not more than 450 Bbls. (Four Hundred & fifty) Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . • *., m & sº sº tº * * * * * * * * * * * $7500.00 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c $1500.00 for Bay Trips or Bank Trips each Average value of Insurance . . . . . . . .9% per annum on Vessel & outfits Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo - $35.00 per month Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . • * ~ * - - - - - - - - . . . . $300,00 Average value of Whaves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore * - $30.000. yearly Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nine Value of Wessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . . . . . . Averaging $8000.00 Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1000.00 each Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seventy five Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per cwt. * - Seventy five cts all kinds Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Two Dollar S 3138 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores . . . . Not any Total Value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . $900.00 (nine Hundred Dollars) Average market value of American Shore Mackerel...#16.00 $12.00 & 8.00 Average market value of Bay Mackerel... . . . . . . . . . . . 12:00 8.00 & 6.00 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year...from $200 to $300. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * s sº $400. per Vessel. yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring. . . . . . . . . . $6600.00 yearly Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . . about $200. yearly Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . about $500 yearly Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Georges, Grand Banks also Western Bank Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel From Capes of Virginia to Bay of Chaleur Autual value of Fish in the water, before taking - Worth nothing in the water, value in the labor and capital Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . the same as fish Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- eries We were once largely engaged in Mackerel fishery in Bay of St Lawrence but this is now unprofitable owing to poor quality & decrease in quantity of the Mack’l of late years All vessels sent there of late years returning largely in debt. Our vessels now being employed on the banks for fish and on our shores for mack'l using seines entirely in- stead of Hooks for Mackl—and trawls mostly for fish ANDREW LEIGHTON Q & WALTER M FALT LEIGHTON & CO. GEORGE A. UBTON Sworn and subscribed to before me, this first day of June 1877 (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW * Notary Public No. 72. This is to certify that the undersigned, composing the firm of late Dodd & Tarr now James G. Tarr & Bro have been engaged in the fish- ing business for the past twenty five years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Twelve No. Of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six trips yearly, to each Vessel, 72 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence 4 2 4. 3 0 3 total 16 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1287 bº. 888 tº 672 tº 1124 blº 0. 190 * Total 4.161. No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 8 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands . . . . . . . . . about one-tenth, (Most caught off shore) Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - five Thousand Dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c... $2,500 per year for each Vessel Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3,500 Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo, Capt $75 Crew $35 per Month Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 yearly each Vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore ($31,000) Thirty one thousand Dollars yearly. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3139 Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * nº e º ſº a s we we ºn a tº e º e s - * * * * * . Four Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . •- sº sº sº dº tº sº º sº tº sº $28,500 Value of Fish lost -----. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -> <- tº sº a sº ºn tº tº º tº us as * * $3,000 Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . thirty one Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. - One Dollar Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bl.------ . . . . . . -------------------------------. . . . . . two Dollars Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores . None taken Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $1300 No 1 2 3 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . $16, 12, 8 - No 1 2 3 Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8 6 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. $215 for past 6 years Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies. . . . . . . . . . . . . $5,000 yearly total in six years $30,000 Amount paid to British fishemen - for herring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4,100 yearly “ “ “ “ $24,600 Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . . , ºb a e Jº as tº a hired none Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1780 Locations frequented by American * Vessels for Fish. . . . . . . Gd Bank Georges Browns Lehave Bradelle &c Locations frequented by American Vessels for Mackerel. . . . . . . . . . . . from Sandy Hook to Bay St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, be. fore taking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing. as raw material valueless Actual value of Mackerel in the Water before taken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . {{ {{ {{ 6% 46 Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- eries During the last four years Mackerel in the Bay of St Lawrence have been comparatively scarce. Seines have gradually been introduced until at present time hook fishing is nearly obsolete. Seine fishing in the Bay of St Lawrence & Chaleur is not practical and has proved a thorough failure and the business has been abandoned The Mackerel fishery is confined to the American coast The Bay Codfishery has been given up for years not a dozen trips has been made from this port within six years We depend upon the deep sea Banks entirely for Halibut & Codfish and employ the British shore boats and fishermen in taking Her. . ring and pay them their price DAVID TARR JAMES G. T.A.R.R. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 31st day of May 1877 (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW - - Notary Public No. 73. - This is is to certify, that the undersigned, composing the firm of Smith & Golt have been engaged in the fishing business for the past 10 years, at Gloucester Mass. and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fifteen No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . * - - - - - - - - - - - Six to each vessel yearly 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 3140 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . 4 5 5 4 3 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. LaWrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 1000 1000 750 600 300 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands . . . . . most caught around the Magdalene Islands. Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . &* tº º ºs = * is º żº sº e º w w is º º $7000 Average Value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3000 Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99% on vessels and outfits Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . . . $35 Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200 each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on Shore. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :: * * * g º ºn tº sº e s m at ºn tº e º a w w ar, as ºr a sº as e g tº $35,000 Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * a we º ſº gº tº dº gº tº tº 1. Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,000 Value of Fish lost - Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - in sº ºn a sm º ºs s is a sº a s dº e º 'º & 10 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. . . . . . . . . . . as º ºr as sº a ºn tº dº s ºr tº dº e = s e g º e º e º sº º * * * * * * * * * * * * * . 50C Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salt- ing, &c., per bbl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1.00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . . D Oil 6) Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... Il Ol) 6) A Verage market Value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . . . . . $16 $12 $8 A Verage market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1.1 $8 $6 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . . . $250 Average amount paid in British ports for Bait, ice, and Various supplies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200 each vessel A mount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . .. . . . . $400 yearly Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200 year A mount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DOI) e. Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Grand Banks, La Have, Georges Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - Cape May to Bay St. Lawrence Actual Value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’leS * The fisheries have changed from hook and line fishing to trawl fishing, and from line fishing to seining for Mackerel We have throughly tested the St. Lawrence fishery, and find it is a failure, our vessels not paying their expenses, We shall send no vessels there this year. Our codfish- ; i. pursued outside of the jurisdiction of any nation, on the ocean banks, ADDISON GOLT JR. SYLVANUS SMITH SMITH & GOLT Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 31st day of May 1877 DAVID W. LOW (Seal.) Notary Public No. 74. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Clark & Somes have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Twenty AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3141 years, at Gloucester Mass., and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eleven No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (55 yearly) Five each vessel yearly 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Trips to Bay of St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . 4 4 2 0 1. 1872 1873 1874 1875 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence 812 680 300 0 60 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . None of any consequence; not one tenth A Verage Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six thousand Dollars Average Value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500 A Verage Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 prot on Vessel & outfits Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . . . $40 A Verage Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $250 each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. $30,000 Number of Vessels lost Value of Vessels lost, including outfits Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CWt- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 50 cts Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a re º we as an us me tº ºn tº e º Te º ºs ºn tº me sº it e º 'º gº as º ºs e º e $1,50 Total Value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . None Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº tº gº tº º $360 - No 1 No 2 No 3 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel . . $16 $12 $8 No 1 No 2 NO 3 Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . $11 $7 $5 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . . . $250 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . &: * m we as e g º ºs e º me tº sº ºn e º sº sº º * * * * * * $3000 yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . $2500 “ Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish r Grand Banks Georges Western Bks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel • Cape May to Gulf St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- eries We have formerly sent vessels to the Bay of St Lawrence from one third to # of our fleet, but the constant reduction in quantity and Quality of the mackerel has rendered that fishery not only unprofitable but absolutely ruinous to continue in it. Our shore mackerel are Worth more money are more readily taken are in better condition. Our Sys- tem of seining cannot be applied in the Bay of St Lawrence as in shoal water the rocky bottom breaks the seine, and in deep water the Herring fill the seine and sink carrying the Mackerel with them. Our vessels enter British Waters only to jºia. supplies Ice Bait &c for which We pay cash JOHN E SOMES GEORGE CLARK JR 3142. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 26th day of July 1877 (Seal.) ** DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 75. * . This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of J F Munson & Company have been engaged in the fishing business for the past twenty-five years, at Gloucester Mass and that since the Washing: ton Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Ten) (10) No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six trips yearly each vessel 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . 3 2 2 1 0 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500 450 510 120 0 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . all caught at Magdalens Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5,000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. $1,000 for Bay trip $600 for Georges Banks Average Value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 per ct on Vessel & Outfits Average value of Captains’ and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . . . $35 Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400 each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. .26,000 Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . •= º me sº tº tº ſº ºn tº • * * * *... º. as sº sº tº e as tº dº is a tº * * * * * 2 Value of Vessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $15,000 Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. 75 Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... we ºn tº me ºn tº as ºn s a m e º 'º e º te as sº tº e s is ea tº e º 'º s º & ºt 200 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores... nothing Total Value of Mackerel do - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . as º ºs ºs º ºs º ºs 66 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . 16, 12, 8 Average market Value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7 5 Average earnings of the Operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . . . $250 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies. . . . . . . . . . . . - e º ºs º ºr º e º sº it tº ſº º ſº º 'º º º ºs º gº e º sº º sº * * * * e º º sº tº $2000 yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . .6000 yearly last five years Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . mºmºmºmºs Amount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * & & as ºn e º me sº wº *=mmemºmº Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Actual value of fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location, and mode of conducting American fish- €I'10S - Trawls have taken the place of hand-lines for fish and Seines are mostly used for Mackerel. Shore off the coast of the U States mackerel- ling is more profitable than any other shorter trips & better Mackerel The Vessels we have sent to the Bay of St Lawrence have not paid their expenses We should have difficulty in shipping a crew for the Bay We consider that fishery an entire failure The quality of the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3143 Mackerell and the great expense of the Bay trips makes it impossible to do any fishing there. None of our vessels use the inshore fisheries of the Dominion $ JOHN F, WONSON & CO | JOHN F. WONSON 3 FREDERIC G. WONSON | ROGER, W, WONSON UFRANKLIN A. WONSON. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 31st day of May 1877 (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW & Notary Public No. 76. STATEMENT OF A. G. PROOTER, OF PROOTER, TRASK & CO. WHOLESALE FISH DEALERS, GLOUCESTER MASSACEIU- SETTS. - In the way of information touching the value of Fish taken in Eng- lish waters, I would state that our firm is extensively engaged in the purchase of Herrings and Mackerel along the shores of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Magdalen Islands and New Foundland. That we have pur- chased of the British fishermen along these shores, during the past Eighteen months, about Twenty thousand (20,000) barrels of Herrings: That we pay for the Herrings—delivered to our vessels at the Magdalen Islands by the British fishermen—Six (6) cents per barrel. These Her- rings are caught in their own seines, and delivered from their own boats; and six (6) cents per barrel is the regular price charged for for the fish so delivered during the season. That for the Herrings caught On the upper Shores and along Anticosti Island we pay on an average Ten (10) cents per barrel. One cargo received by us during the past month, consisting of Eighteen hundred (1800) barrels, cost in gold One hundred eighty two ($182) Dollars. This was the actual cost of the Herrings delivered, fresh, on the deck of our vessel, and includes the use of the Seines, nets and boats of the English fishermen and their labor in securing and delivering. That the average cost of the New Foundland Herring taken at Fortune Bay, Boone Bay and Bay of Islands delivered to our vessels, fresh—is Fifty (50) cents per barrel. This class of Herrings are all caught in nets, which method increases the cost. The nets used cost about Twelve (12) Dollars each, and they will average to wear only about two seasons; the price mentioned in- cludes all wear and tear of nets and gear, use of boats and labor in de- livering. Some of these Herrings are brought from thirty to forty miles in boats to be delivered to our vessels. In all the Herring fish- eries, as far as our actual experience goes, in the British waters, my judgment is, that the cost to us of the product as delivered to our vessels is not more than equal to the value of the labor actually expended in securing and delivering them, including the cost and wear and tear of the material used. For Mackerel caught in British waters, along the shores mentioned, we pay from Three (3) to Four (4) Dollars per barrel. This is for mack- erel delivered ready for packing from their boats, and includes the use of expensive gear, cost of splitting and labor, and cost of delivering. The abundance of Mackerel on our own shore for the past four or five years; their superior quality and low price has made it more profitable for us to purchase mackerel caught on our own shore, than those caught 3144 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. in English waters; even at the low price at which the English fish were offered. We buy and dispose of $350,000. worth of fish yearly. A. G. PROCTER, COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS. Essex ss. GLOUCESTER July 28th 1877 Then personally appeared the above named Addison G. Procter and made oath that all the foregoing statements by him subscribed are true to the best of his knowledge and belief. Before me - (Seal.) & DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 77. I Aaron Smith Master of the schooner Cora E Smith I was born in North Haven. Maine do depose & say That I started from Gloucester on the 25th of April 1877 for a Mackerel voyage off Block Island was absent one Month and took 200 Barrels Mackerel with seine, all No 3 and worth Six Dollars per Bbl On the 8th of June 1877 started on a trip for shore Mackerel and took 160 Bbls at round Pond State of Maine These Mackerel were taken within 10 rods of the shore Most of these Mackerel were No 2 and brought 12 dollars per Bbl on an average. I have been 20 years engaged in fishing for Mackerel have been eleven seasons in the Bay of St Lawrence never done so well there as on our own shores. I have assisted in taking over 3500 Barrels of Mackerel in the Gulf of St Lawrence and of that amount not 200 Barrels were taken within 3 miles of the shore and so far as I know the same proportion will hold in the catch of other American Vessels. Ten years ago when we depended on the Hook fishing the Gulf of St Lawrence Mackerel fishery could be pursued to advantage but since the introduction of Seines it cannot be pursued profitably - - AARON SMITH STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS } SS COUNTY OF ESSEX $ GLOUCESTER Aug. 13th 1877. Then, personally appeared the above named Aaron Smith and made oath that the above statement by him subscribed is true. Before me (Seal.) e DAVID W. LOW Notary Public Also appeared Jerome B. Thomas one of the Crew of Schooner Cora E. Smith who on oath, deposes and says that the above statement by Aaron Smith Master is true. he also deposes and says that he was Master of Sch. David Brown Jr. in 1869 & 1870 and prosecuted the Mackerel Fishery in the Bay of St. Lawrence that I did so poorly that I left fishing as an occupation for several years and consider that Mack- erel Fishing with Seines on American Shores more profitable than the Bay fishing. My residence is North Haven in State of Maine. JEROME B THOMAS STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS | SS COUNTY OF ESSEx o GLOUCESTER Aug 13. 1877 Then personally appeared the above named Jerome B. Thomas and made oath that the above statement by him subscribed is true. Before 1T 69 - (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 31.45 No. 78. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of E. Burrill & Co have been engaged in the fishing business for the past 14 years, at Newburyport Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six, No. of Trips made Averaging from four to Six Trips yearly to Bay and home Fishing 1872. 1873, 1874, 1875, 1876 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . 4. 4. 4. 3. none. 1872. 1873. 1874. 1875. 1876 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 1000 960 758. 555. n One No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, including Magdalene Islands 560 Bbls, or about that, including Magdalene Islands Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . For Bay trip say 1000$ Average Value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . 9 pret on schooners and outfits. Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo say Per Mo 353. Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . tº e ºs ºs e º e º tº e º ºs 250$ Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore - say 12000$ Numbers of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . ... as tº a sº tº sº e s a tº º ºn , tº tº & & one. (say 12000$) Value of Vessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - say 7500$ Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . say 3000$ Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ----- IlOD 6) Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CW ti - Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per bbl . . . .º, e s - sº * * * * > * * * * * * * * * g º 2 is sº * * * * * * * tº s sº a sº tº G & ºn tº r" is e ve ... Two dollars Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores... not any Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . $1120. including Magdalene Isls Average market value of American Shore Mackerel. . . . . . . . 16$ 12# 8$ A Verage market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12$ 83 6$. A Verage earnings of the operative fishermen per year from 1405 to 250$ Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies. ------------. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . © r s a v' is ºn as .. say 4088 yearly. Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs according to damages by gales. Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish w - Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel º from Capes of Virginia to Bay Chaleur Actual value of Fish in the water, before worth nothing in the water taking | g & Actual value of Mackerel in the water, be- º lºs in the Labor fore taken apital. Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’16S Our vessels. have always been in the Mackerel fishery, and were 3.146 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. formerly employed in the Bay of St Lawrence, but for the last few years, owing to the small catch, and poor quality of the Fish, have been obliged to fish upon the American shore, using seines. We did send for two years seines in the Bay of St Lawrence, but they were never used there. and were put on shore and kept until the vessels returned . in the Fall. making to us, an expense, for which we had no equiv- alent. 1. - E. BURRILL. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this eighteenth day of May 1877 (Seal.) E. F. BARTLETT Notary Public No. 79. . This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of I. H Boardman and T. H. Boardman & Co. have been engaged in the fishing business for the past forty years, at Newburyport, Mass—and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . average 5 yearly No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . averaging 5 to each vessel yearly -> 1872 1873° 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . 12 9 5 — 2 — 2 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence 3100 1756 1240 470 235 . No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands . . . . . . 4 as e s e º 'o a ºn e º e º ºs e s ºr us * not exceeding 400 Bbls Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , or u : * * * * * * * * * $8500 Average Value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1200. Average Value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 prot for vessel, yearly Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . . . $40. Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $300 Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors, and labor on shore say $14,000 yearly Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None Value of Vessels lost, including Outfits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... t. WO Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, Salting, &c., per CWt. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Seventy-five cents Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - one dollar & fifty cents Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . None Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * $600. Average market value of American Shore Mackerel. . . . . $16 $12 $8 Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $11. $6. $5. Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year from $150 to $300 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Supplies about $350 prºvessel yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring. . . . . . . . . . . $3000 yearly Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $900. yearly Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . $400 yearly average Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Georges, Grand Banks Western Banks Labrador & Newfoundland Coasts AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3147 Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - from Cape Henry to Bay Chaleur. Actual value of Fish in the water before taking . . . . . nothing whatever Actual Value of Mackerel in the water, before taken. . . . . . . same value Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’leS & Many years ago, we were largely interested in the Mackerel Fisheries OWning quite a fleet of vessels and which were largely employed in the Bay of St Lawrence fisheries: of late years owing to the scarcity of Fish in those waters, & the poorer quality of them, we have gradually aban- doned the Fishing grounds there, and have employed our vessels on our own Shores in Hook Fishing. but mostly with Seines, at the present. season we shall not send a single vessel to the Bay of St Lawrence for the catching of Mackerel, for our vessels in those waters have not, of late, paid their expenses, the two vessels employed by us the past sea- Son in the Bay of St. Lawrence, with large crews and employed during the Whole season, landing only 165 & 70 Bbls. respectively. ISAAC E BOARDMAN for T. H. BOARDMAN & CO. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this twenty ninth day of May 1877 [Seal.] E. F. BARTLETT, Notary Public As to the liberty conceded by the “Treaty of Washington " to the American Fishermen, to take Fish within three miles of the shores of the Provinces, it is, practically, of little value, inasmuch as most of their Mackerel are taken by our Fishermen outside of that line, and in our opin- ion, the liberty so granted, is much more than overbalanced by allowing the Provinces to import Fish of all descriptions into the markets of the United States, free of duties, thus competing successfully with our own Fishermen, together with the right to fish on our shores for Mackerel, (in which occupation they now are employed in seining on our Southern Coast,) together with all other kinds of Fish including Bait, on which the Province Fishermen in a great measure depend for their supply from the United States.—In my opinion, (and I speak now from an ex- perience of more than forty years,) and that of many American Fisher- men and owners of Fishing vessels with whom I have conversed, the Provinces have by far, in a pecuniary point of view, an overwhelming advantage already by the terms of the Treaty. In fact, the concession made to our Fishermen is of little pecuniary value, the only real benefit is, the avoiding of conflicts between the American Fishermen and the armed Cruisers of the Provinces, by the former fishing on or near an imaginary line, and by the seizure and condemnation of American ves- sels in some instances, solely by the preponderance in numbers of evi- dence by the larger crews of the cruisers, which have heretofore been fitted out and maintained at a large expence to the Provincial or British Governments, and thus creating trouble and hostile feeling between the Contending parties, and the people of both nations.— - I. H. BOARDMAN Newburyport Mass. May. 1877. No. 80. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Ire- land & Trefethen have been engaged in the fishing business for the past 3148 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Twenty three years, at Newburyport and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Three No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six yearly to each vessel No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . lº lº * lsº lsº Nº. & º of Mackerel from Bay St. 1876 1875 1874, 1873 1872 - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 240 360 250 265 No. of Barrels of Mackerell caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Caught all off Magdelens Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . 1000 Dollars for 6 mos Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 per ct on Vessel & Outfits Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per IDO - - - - - - - - - , , ºn tº º ºs º º ºs º ºs e e g tº t is a tº a P & . e. e. e º ſº e º an e º is an ºr as we as as a Nº. 30 Dollars Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... $200 each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-house, &c., for curing and pack- ing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on - Shore - - - - - - - - - - - - -- . . . . . . . . - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * e º 'º s $5000 Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * ºn gº ºn tº e s m e º sº º a tº e º a ºn s & 4, & we as ºn tº OD 6 Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3000 Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per bbl. Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores . . . . None Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * None Average market value of Aumerican Shore Mackerel . . . . . . $16 $12 $8 Average market Value of Bay Mackerel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12 $8 $6 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year . . . . . . $125, 6 Mos Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish . . Georges & Lahave Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... s. s = a w Cape May to Bay St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . .*Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €rléS We have had vessels in the Bay of St Lawrence for past 12 years. We have now changed our business to Bank fisheries for Cod & Had- dock as the Bay of St Lawrence has proved a failure our vessels not paying us any profit. One of our firm has personally been in this Bay fishery and in one of our vessels. The inshore fisheries of the Dominion is entirely useless to us. GEORGE W TREFETELEN for the firm Sworn and subscribed to before me, this eighteenth day of May 1877 [Seal.] - E. F. BARTLETT Notary Public AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. . 3149 No. 81. . This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of R. Bayley & Son have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Forty years, at Newburyport and that since the Washington Treaty, so Called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . Two (2) Mackerel One Labrador No of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Four 4% TWO 4% No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Four No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . Seven hundred No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . Quantity unknown, very few if any Average value of vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thirty-five hundred dolls Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . Thirty-two hundred dolls. Average value of Insurance, - Four and one quarter pr. cent a year for six months. A Verage value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo., Capt $75. Crew $28 Each Average value of Commissions, &c. Two hund & fifty dolls ea. vessel ea. year . Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Ten thousand dolls. Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº s. as tº sº tº sº sº in sº a One Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . Ten thousand dolls Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • - - - - - - - - - Eight thousand dolls. Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... None Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. Tº Value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per l. Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. - No fish, cannot estimate Mack. Total value of Mackerel do. 4% 46 4% Average market value of American Shore Mackerel |Eleven & a quarer dolls pr. bbl. Average market value of Bay Mackerel. Seven & one half dolls. pr. bbl. Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year Two hundred & fifty dolls. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Two hundred dolls Amount paid to British fishermen for EHerring . . . . . Two thousand dolls Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . Fourteen Hundred dolls. Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . Two hundred & fifty dolls Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish - Gulf & Bay of St Lawrence and Labrador Coast Ilocations frequented by American vessels for mackerel - Cape Henry to Eastport Me Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken... . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- GI’leS - We have employed our vessels in the Shore, Bay of St Lawrence and Labrador fisheries during the past ten years and the business has proved so unremunerative and hazardous that we have abandoned it. 3150 * AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. The Labrador fishery we consider very uncertain business and the risk very great more especially when the vessels are compeled to stay late in the fall, as is the case most of the time in latter years, in order to fill up if possible with herring, which have to be procured of the resi- dent fishermen R. BAYLEY & SON Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Twenty third day of May 1877. J. T. BROWN (Seal.) Notary Public. No. 82. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Charles O. Currier have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Nine years, at Newburyport, Mass. and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six No. of Trips made No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8000 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalen Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Not Known Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * g º sº tº º tº dº $4000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 e ºs º ſº * $1500 Average Value of Insurance . . . . . . . -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4000 Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. - $35 prºmonth Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . $250 pryear each Vessell Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . $8000 Number of Vessels lost Value of Vessels lost, including outfits Value of Fish lost - Number of Lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per cwt. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ----------------------- . . . . . . . . . . $1,00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores . . . . . . . . 0 Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..., 0 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel Nº. 1 $17.00 Nº. 2 $11,50 Nº. 2 $8.00 Average market value of Bay Mackerel - Nº. 1. $11.00 Nº. 2 $7.00 Nº. 3 $5.50 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . ... . $200 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies . . . . . . . . • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $75 prvessell A mount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages g Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . $30.00 pryear prvessell Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel . -- From Cape May to Gd Menan & Bay St. Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking * Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken AwarD of THE FISHERY COMMISSION." 3151. Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’16S - On account of the uncertainty of the Bay fishing, most of the New- buryport Vessels gave up that fishing about twelve years ago, and en- gaged in the coast fishing, using Seines instead of hook and lines, doing a fair business, while those who continued the Bay Mackerelling, have: made a losing business, and will mostly give up, and enter the Shore fishing - - \ CHAS. O. CURRIER Sworn and subscribed to before me, this twenty-first day of May 1877 (Seal.) E. F. BARTLETT Notary Public No. 83. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Union Wharf Co have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Thirty years, at Provincetown Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . Seventeen No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº wº se tº sº e s sº ... . . Sixty-Eight No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six since 1871. No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence - - Twelve hundred bbls. No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - Five Thousand dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . One thousand dollars Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Four thousand dollars Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo Thirty dollars Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . Four 96 to Caps of Vessel Average Value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore - Twenty five thousand dolls. Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One Value of vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . Five thousand dollars Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * tº º sº º sº m 'm gº None Number of lives Lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. • * One dollar Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TWO dollars . Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . None Total Value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None A Verage market Value of American Shore Mackerel. . . . . . . . Ten dollars A Verage market Value of Bay Mackerel. . . . . . . . . . . Eight dollars prlbbl A Verage earnings of the operative fishermen per year - . Two hundred twenty five dollars Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies Fifty dollars Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - None Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . -e ºs º ºs tº ºr tº º º gº tº ºn None Amount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . . . . One hundred dollars . 3152 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Georgies. Block Island. Eastern Shore Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - Coast of United States & Gulf St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- eries Within the last three years we have had but two vessels en- gaged in Fishing in British Waters and they for Mackerel alone. The Mackerel fishing being done on the Coast of the United States to and along the Eastern Coast of Maine and on Georges Bank—not resorting to British Waters at all. The Gulf of St Lawrence Fishery is so un- profitable that we consider it a failure - E M DYER l E O GROSS | A. T. WILLIAMS. UNION whº go LUTHER NICKERSON y W. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Eleventh day of May 1877 (Seal.) - THOS. EIILLIARD - Notary Public No. 84, This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Central Wharf Co formerly R. E. & A. Nickerson & Co. & E. S. Smith & Co have been engaged in the fishing business for the past twenty years, at Brovincetown, Mass: and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of vessels employed Six to twelve (viz some years 6, other years up to twelve No. Of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . five to seven yearly to each Vessel No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none since 1873 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . none since 1873 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands any since 1873, but few inside of 3 miles ever. 1873 150 Bbls Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . Forty five hundred dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . .2500$ to each Vessel Average Value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $250 Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo Captain 65.5 Crew 28.8 Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2003 each Vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore... $2000. Number of Wessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - One in 1873 Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7500 Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ** - sº e º ºs e º gº e º - “S $800 Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I] OL10 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt - - - one dollar on Codfish Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . .* * * * u, a we e º - s ºr e g º me • * 4 s ºn a s = ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * $2.50 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . . DOI) 0 Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . $10. delivered at Provincetown 1873 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel - -º- No. 1s $16. No 2 $12. No. 3 $8. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3153 Average market value of Bay Mackerel No 1. $12. No 2. $8. No 3. $6. (our average in 1872. $10.20 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year 2 $225 at our place Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies $250 each Vessel including wages paid their–(total for 9 Vessels would be 2250,3 'Amount paid to British fishermen for herring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... - - Il OIle Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages . . . . . . . . . . . . 100, $ per-year Amount paid in British ports for repairs t thus far small repairs, but liable to large in case of accident Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Grand, Western & Georges Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel se from Cape May to Eastport, and Georges Banks Actual value of Fish in the Water, before taking. . . . . . . sº º ſº º ſº * * Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €1°10'S - We have sent no Vessels into the Bay of St. Laurence for Mackerel since 1873 and only two for Codfish, The facts are we do find the fish- ing business, (more especially for Mackerel in the Bay of St Lawrence) does not pay, that is our experience and is the only reason that we have allmost wholy discontinued sending our Vessels their, and than again Mackerel takeing their are not as Valuable as those taken on our Coast, the fishing grounds are far distant, bad weather sets in much earlier their than on our Coast, makeing it more hazardous, also as most of the Mackerel now are taken with Seines and we consider the Bay a very difficult place for Seining. We consider the fishing grounds in Bay of St. Laurence inside of three miles from Shore (especially for Mackerel) practically useless to us, and would not fit a Vessel under any consider- ation, looking to that locality for the success of their Voyage CENTRAL WEIARF CO by A. NICKERSON ATKINS NICKERSON ) JAMES A. SMALL I ABNER B. RICH } central Wharf Co. NATHAN YOUNG W Subscribed and sworn to before me this ninth day of June A. D. 1877 (Seal.) B. F. HUTCEIINSON - Notary Public No. 85. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of H. &. S Cook & Co have been engaged in the fishing business for the past twenty five years, at Provincetown Mass and that since the Washing- ton Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * * * * g º ºs s = * * Eight No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . one trip yearly total Eight Trips No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence - One Trip in 1876 Cod Fishing (Failure) No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * None No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - ... None 198 F. 3154 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Five Thousand dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . $3,000 to each vessel Average Value of Insurance -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. $248.00 each vessel Average value of Captains’ and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. $40). Forty Dollar Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $50 Fifty 66 . Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on te Shore - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... . . . $1.2.000 Twelve Thousand Dollars Number of vessels lost. -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TWO Value of Vessels lost, including outfits $14,000 Fourteen Thousand Dollars Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12,000 Twelve Thousand Dollars No. of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , sº e e s s e e s e s m sº e s e s e e s = e s s Thirteen Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CWt: - - - - - - -* gº tº gº tº tº º sº tº e º 'º sº tº Lº tº sº a º ºs as * tº ºg º 'º tº e º ºs & 75 cts Seventy five cents Total ºne of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. ...None Total Value of Mackerel do -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None Average market value of American Shore Mackerel Average market value of Bay Mackerel Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . $200,00 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies Amount paid to British fishermen for herring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . . . . $600,00 Yearly Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish - Erom Long Island to Newfoundland Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . • * * * * * Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken Eacts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’léS' For the last fifteen years we have sent two vessels only to the Bay of St LaWerenc Cod Fishing and both voyages proved a failure. for the past eight or ten years the fishing in the Bay St Lawerence has been of no profit to us for neither Cod or Mackeral Fishing, and the year of 1876 was nearly a Total failure. the Mackerel Fishing is carried on now by Seining and our vessels at Provincetown do better at fishing nearer home, our cod Fishermen do not fish in British limits, and it does not pay for our Mackerel Fishermen, EI & S COOK & CO Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Ninth day of May 1877 (Seal.) THOS. HILLIARD :- Notary Public No. 86. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of F. M. Freeman have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Five years, at Provincetown Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eight No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Five No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . ten in five years cod fishing AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3155 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . IlOL10 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il One Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - $4,000. Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. .... $2000 Each vessell yearly Average Value of Insurance. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $150 Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. $35,00 Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Each vessell yearly Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore-----------------------------------------------. $15,000 Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- - - - - - - ITOI16 Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . -, * º º ºs e º is ºn º One Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per GWt:- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . $1,00 Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. ----------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $2,00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. Il OI16) Total value of Mackerel do ,-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IlOIlê § No 1 No 2 NO 3 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel No 1 No 2 NO 3 Average market Value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . 12, $8, $6, A Verage earnings of the operative fishermen per year..... -- - $200, Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies. ----------------------------------------------- nothing Amount paid to British fishermen for herring....... . . . . . . . . . nothing Amount paid to British fishermen as wages...... • * - ſº tº e º e º sm ºn nothing Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Western and Grand Bank Georges & Block Island Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel º American Shores Bay St Laurence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken. . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting Amer- can fisheries The Fisheries have changed from shore fishing to deep sea and Bank fishing a number of Vessels sent to Bay St Laurence from this port last year fishing on Bank Bradley on Orphen and did not pay expenses We do not use the British wortes in side of thre miles for any fisherys Whatever - E M FREEMAN Sworn and subscribed to before me, this ninth day of May 1877 Be- fore the subscriber a Notary Public for the County of Barnstable (Seal.) B E HUTOEIINSON Notary Public No. 87. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Free- man and Hilliard have been engaged in the fishing business for the past 3156 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Twenty years, at Provincetown and that since the Washington Treaty, So called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as fol- lows: No. of Vessels employed No. of Trips made No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands , ºr Average value of Vessels each Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. Average value of Insurance. * Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. Average value of Commissions, &c. - Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Number of Vessels lost Value of Wessels lost, including outfits Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost - Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per cwt. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. Total Value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores Total value of Mackerel do. Average market value of American Shore Mackerel Average market value of Bay Mackerel Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year Ayºe amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- p11es -, * Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages A mount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €1°16S Por eight years last past we have sent our fishing vessels, averaging Seven in number to the Grand Banks. During this time have not sent a vessel to the Gulf of St. Lawrence for fishing purposes, from the fact that We have been unable to calculate upon any profit which might re- Sult from such voyages. * N. D. FREEMAN J. D. HILLIARD FREEMAN & HILLIARD Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Eleventh day of May 1877 (Seal.) * THOS. HILLIARD - Notary Public No. 88. * This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Crocker & Atwood have been engaged in the fishing business for the past fourteen years, at Provincetown and that since the Washington AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3157 Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Five No. of Trips made. - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . about five trips each vessel yearly No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. -- - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . .‘. . . . None No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands........ ... t e º se s e º as sº tº º º sº a º ºs e º as as sº we s we e s m as * * * * * * None Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Five Thousand Dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c... $2500. on each vessel yearly Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $300. On “ 46 66 Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo... $30. each man per month Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . $250. each vessel yearly Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. - $3500. yearly a' Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TWO Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : $11,000. Value of Fish lost.------------------. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ---. $150. Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per cwt. 7 5– Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, Salting, &c., per ! ------------------------------------------------------ , $2.É.9- Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. -- .Noiſé Total value of Mackerel do. --- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sº tº sº º º None Average market value of American Shore Mackerel Average market value of Bay Mackerel Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year . . . . . . . . . . . ... .0 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish - º Massachusetts Bay and Nantucket Shoals Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel American Shores north of Cape May. Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . ValuleSS Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . do Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €TI 63S Our vessels being engaged in the Mackerel Seining business almost exclusively and as they could not Seine fish in British Waters we were Obliged to fish on the American coast. CROCKER & ATWOOD Sworn and subscribed to before me, this ninth day of May 1877 B E EIUTCEIINSON (Seal.) Notary Public No. 89. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of E & E K. Cook, having been engaged in the fishing business for the past, Forty years, at Provincetown and that since the Washington Treaty, So called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: 3158 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . Seven No. of Trips made - 1. No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . ... • * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1876. No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence........ - ... 100 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . .* is s a s is a sº 4 e s sº as ----- In ODG Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nº 2 ſº tº e s & $5.000, Average Value of Oufits, Salt, Bait, &c...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . $800 trip— Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . Aſ e as tº is as a $100 each vessel yearly Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per IDO - - - - - - - - - - º e º as e is a tº e s = e º e º s see tº a e ºs e º a s & sº e s is e e º e s a e º e a e º a $35 Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200 Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on Shore. . . . . . . . s • - s a • * & Cº º ſº as ºn tº dº is ºn as as ºn as º sº gº as ºr sº ap & e º a º & ſº as s = e tº $6000– Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº e s s e e º an e C Three Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,000 Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . tº sº *s tº º ºs º ºs º ºn tº ſº gº tº dº º e º ºs º gº ºn e e º e º gº, aſ $8000. Number of Lives lost. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IlO1162, Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CWt - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1,00. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. IlOH)6 Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IlOIł6). Average market value of American Shore Mackerel No. $16. no 2. $1 2 no 3. $8 sold for Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . sold for no 1. $11.no 2. $8.00 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year . . . . . . . . $200 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies - Amount paid to British fishermen for herring................. Il OIlê Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OIT 69 Amount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . . . . . . . a ſº sº as º ºs e e In Oſle, Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish...Banks New found land Western & Georgies. -- Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel ...Long Island Sound to Bay St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . tº we & 4 & as dº º nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting Amer- ican fisheries The Mackerel Fisheries have changed very much during the last tem years formerly the fish were caught with Line & Hook but now the universal way to take them is with Seins The Cod fisheries have also very materially changed the Cod fish were formerly taken with hand line & Hook but Trawls are now mostly used. Our Vessels all of them take their fish from the Banks of New Foundland we have tried the Bay fishing but with us it did not pay. Our Mackerl fishermen all of them fish in American Waters for the reason that the Bay fishing does not pay them. as the Mackerel are not near as plenty nor are they as good a quality as they can find nearer home - E. P. COOK . Sworn and subscribed to before me, this tenth day of May 1877 (Seal.) THOS. HILLIARD Notary Public AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3159 No. 90. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of J & L N Paine have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Sixteen years, at Provincetown Mass. and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Seven No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One Trip yearly total Seven trips No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence none işi lsº lsº lsº lsº 1s; 6 total 6 yrs 12 vessels. No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . • Gº & e º 'º IlOIlê No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In Oſlo Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . © tº º ºs e º no e . . Four thousand dollars Average of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c...... s tº e º sº tº º º º is $2000. to each vessel Average Value of Insurance. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $240. each vessel Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo... $35. Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $50. Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - º it tº sº e º ºs e º ºs e º t , º ºs e º ºs º is º ºr. as a re is & $10,000 Number of Vessels lost. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Il OIl62 Value of Vessels lost, including outfits Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In ODG Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OL10 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CW't - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - u tº e º ºs º ºs tº a ºne e º º ºs e º & & tº º 75 ctS. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &g &c., per bbl Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores none Total Value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T10116) Average market value of American Shore Mackerel Average market value of Bay Mackerel Average earnings of the Operative fishermen per year. . . . . . * * * * * * $200. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies - $200 each vessel $400. yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring......... tº sº e s an e ºs nothing Amount paid to British fishermen as wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $400. yearly Amount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..., e 49 s sº & $100. Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish IFrom Long Island to Newfoundland including Bay of St Lawrence Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €THeS - Eor the past Sixteen years we have sent two vessels to Gulf of St Lawrence. their voyages have not been as remunerative as those of our vessels that have fished in other localities The last year 1876. the voyages in the Bay of St Lawrence were almost a total failure. No fish are taken by our vessels inside of British limits. - J &; L N PAINE Sworn and subscribed to before me, this ninth day of May 1877 Be- fore the Subscriber a Notary Public for the County of Barnstable (Seal.) - B E EIUTC El INSON Notary Public 3160 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 91. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Philip A Whorf have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Seven years, at Provincetown Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -, e is tº dº tº Five No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One average time five months No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands ...... ... º. in tº tº º, e is ºn tº sº e s as sº tº e º ºs º º sº e º ºs º ºr sº º 'º (A tº ſº tº s None Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $4.500 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c.. $2,000 yearly preach vessel Average Insurance.... On each vessel $1500, Outfits insured for full amount - Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo... $35,00 Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . $100, Each vessel annually Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore - $7,000, Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Value of Vessels lost, including outfits Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CWt. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - s tº º 'º gº e º 'º G & º º Gº $1,00 Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., Joer bbl. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $2,00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. .00 None Total Value of Mackerel do - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 None Average market value of American Shore Mackerel. ... No 1 $16, No 2s $12, No 3s $8. *. - Average market value of Bay Mackerel .... No 1 $12, No 2 $8, No 3.86. Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year . . . . . . . . . . . $170, Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . $300. * Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Western, and Grand Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel * American shores Bay St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking..... * - - - - - - - - Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries In my experience Bay fishing in British waters has been very unprof- itable and in many cases tended with loss both to owners and crews. Our fishing consists largely of Western and Grand Bank fishing some of the smaller vessels fishing around our own shores Do not use the British waters inside of three miles - P A WHORF Sworn and subscribed to before me, this ninth day of May 1877 (Seal.) B E HUTCEHINSON Notary Public AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3.16.1 No. 92. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of B. A. Lewis & Co have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Twelve years, at Provincetown and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . dº tº s is sº as a es e s m 's sº e º s m in we ºs e º ºs e º 'º e º ºr e > v ºs e º 'º º 5 No. of Trips made------, - . . . . . -------- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 per year No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none for 7 years No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . ------------------------ $3000.00 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . $2500,00 per year Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $400,00 “ “ Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo... $35.00 Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $250.00 per year Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. $8000.00 Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... None Value of Vessels lost, including outfits - Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost. . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -... One Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. Tº value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bl. Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores Total value of Mackerel do. Average market value of American Shore Mackerel Average market value of Bay Mackerel Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish. . . . . . . Grand Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries Untill within 7 or 8 years we sent vessels in St Lawrence bay for Mackerel, Our experience was that vessels that went there done noth- ing. could not pay their expences, So we sent our vessels Seineing off our own shores and found they done much better, This is the expe- rience of all who sent vessels for Mackerel in the bay from Provincetown - B. A. LEWIS Sworn and subscribed to before me, this tenth day of May 1877 (Seal.) TEIOS. HILLIARD Notary Public No. 93. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of David Conwell have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Twenty six years, at Provincetown Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: 3.162 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. of Wessels employed . . . . . . . - - - - - - - ... ------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Seven No. of Trips made...... * - e s = * * * * * * tº e º us º ºs º ºs ºn tº a tº as sº e º 'º one Trip a year No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº º Gº dº º 'º tº gº & º ºf IlOD 6) No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . • & º e º º te º º Il OITO No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands........ • e º a • * * * * * * * ** tº dº º Aº e º 'º e = e º e º an º ºs In ODG Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . Forty five Hundred dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. Two Thousand dollars each Sch’r Average Value of Insurance......... Two hundred dollars each vessels Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo . . $35. Average value of Commissions, &c & One Hundred Twenty dollars each Schr Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore ** Fifteen thousand dollars yearly Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... as tº º be sº se & sº tº º º ºs e º as a ºn as s º Il Oſle Value of Vessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . { % Value of Fish lost ......... © e = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - { % Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $1,00 Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ** g º 'º e º sm as de º sº tº sº as º ºr -º, sº º m as º gº ºs º a tº e ∈> * * * * * * * * * * * $2,00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British Shores. . . none Total Value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - 66 Average market value of American Shore. Mackerel I sold for $14,50, $9 & $6 Average market value of Bay Mackerel. - - - - - - . . . . . e ºs e s m e ºs - had none Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. $150,00 at my place Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs & Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish - t Grand Banks La Have & Western Bank Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Cape May to Sidney C. B. Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I'10S In regard to Fishing in British waters for the past Seven years it has not (in general) been profitable, Codfish have been plentier nearer home and the prices for new fish being better than for fish salted a longer time. I have keep my Vessels on the home grounds and Grand Bank, I have sent no vessels to the Bay of St Lawerance this seven years. neather have my Vessels taken Codfish or mackeral inside the precribed British limets DAVID CONWIELL Sworn and subscribed to before me, this tenth day of May 1877 (Seal.) TEIOS. HILLIARD, - Notary Public. No. 94. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Cen- tral Wharf Company have been engaged in the fishing business for the Award of THE FISHEBy commission. 31.63 past. Thirteen years, at Wellfleet and that since the Washington Treaty, So called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº gº tº 9 e º 'º e º 'º a dº e º ºve . Thirteen 13 No. of Trips made -------------------------- 4 to Each vessel yearly - 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence ...... 0 4 0 1. 1. No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence.... 450 75 45 4- 1873 1875 1876 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - all caught at Magdeline Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5500. Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2400. AVerage Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 711 Ea. VeSSel Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo $35. Pr Month Average value of Commissions, &c.... . . . . . . . . . . $200. to Each vessel AVerage value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. . $15,000 Number of Wessels lost ........ * @ º ºs ºn tº one vessel at Bay St. Lawrence Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7.900. Value of Fish lost........... - - - - - - - - - - • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $2000. . Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . & Me • is a s e is One. Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CWt. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 75 cts $2.00 Tº Value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, sº per an e º 'º e º ſº a we e º sº se tº as e s a e º e is my e s an us le as as a tº Gº e º e s a s m e as - - - - - - - - - - - - - $2.00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores... None Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Average market value of American Shore Mackerel.... 16.00 12.00 8.00 A Verage market value of Bay Mackerel... . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.00. 8.00. 6.00 A Verage earnings of the operative fishermen per year $125.00 at our place Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies---------------------------------------------- . . . . . Nothing Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . - * u, º a tº º s: º ºs º ºs º ºs ºn None Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish al - Grand Banks & Georges Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Erom Cape May to Mt. Desert Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking............. Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken. . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €T16S For the past ten years fishing in British waters has been unprofitable. We confine our business to American waters entirely now. We could not procure an american crew to fish in Bay of St Lawrence. The ves- Sels that have been sent there have made an entire failure and great loss to their owners & fitters. Our business is strictly confined to Mack- erel fishing. Our Shore Mackerel are of much better quality & bring: much larger prices than the bay Mackerel. - STEPHEN YOUNG agt Cent Whf Co Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 10 day of May 1877 (Seal.) THOMAS EVEMP - Notary Public 3164 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 95. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Commer- cial Wharf Co. have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Twenty five years, at Wellfleet and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fifteen No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº e & tº ºn a dº e º ºs e tº gº Four Ea. vessel No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None since 1872. No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . None No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore not in- cluding. Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None .Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . s tº sº º ºs ºs e º gº tº tº e as “ $6500. Ea Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2000, ach vessel Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $765 ach vessel Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages permo... $35. Ea AVerage Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200. Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, in- cluding expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. - $13,000 Number of Vessels lost. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * - e º sº e º e º ºs e º ºs º- e e s e s a e s = * None Number of lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . --- None Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CWt. ----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - e r = • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ~ * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 75 CtS Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting salting &c., per bbls-------------------- & a us s is e º O s sº e ºs º ºs e e s º º ºs e º is º ºs e º us e º 'º $2.00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores.... None Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Average market value of American Shore Mackerél . . . . 16.00 12.00 8.00 AVerage market Value of Bay Mackerel - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . 12. 8. 6 A Verage earnings of the Operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . . . $125, Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies.----------------------- .* e º f tº sº s = e º ºs º ºr º e s = e = * * * * * * * * * * * * None Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... None A mount paid to British fishermen as Wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Grand Bank & Georges Location frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - • - Cape Hery & Mt. Dessert Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken - Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €T162S - . By reasons of entire change in mode of Catching Mackerel, Viz from Eſook and line to Seine, The Mackl fishing in the Bay of St Lawrence is not prosecuted by our fishermen the waters of the Gulf are not Calculated for Seining owing to shallowness and tendency of the fish to frequent the shores, which entirely precludes the possibillity of taking them in quantities NOAH SWETT Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 14th day of May 1877 (Seal.) - TEIOS REMP Notary Public AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 31.65 No. 96. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Mer- cantile Wharf Co have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Seven years, at Wellfleet and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . s... Twenty (20) No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 to Each vessel yearly - 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence.... 0 trips 4 0 () 0 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . 800 Bb No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . None caught near Magdalin Islands Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ----. $6500, Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2500, Each A Verage Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $800, Each vessel Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . $35, Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . • e º & ºr e $200 Each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. $48,000 Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - dº º ºs - ſº sº ºne º º ºs ºf sº e e s is " One Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $9,000 Value of Fish lost---------------------------. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Number of Lives lost. -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Total Value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 75 ct;S Tºº! Value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, sº per 901 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * ºr . e. up º ºn as A as ºn e s e s tº ... $2.00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. ...Nothing Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Average market value of American Shore Mackerel.... 1% 1% sº AVerage market value of Bay Mackerel...... . . . . . . . . lºo so dº A Verage earnings of the operative fishermen per year . . . . . . . . . . . . . $150. A Verage amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $200 since the Treaty Amount paid to British fishermen for herring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing A mount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing A mount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish We send none fishing Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel • ? - Brom Cape May to Mt. Desert Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual Value of Mackerel in the water, before taken. . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’19S +. We have sent no vessels to Bay of St. Lawrence since 1873, that year We sent four, they did not pay expenses. We lost money on every vessel. Since that time knowing that the business in Bay of St. Lawrence could not prove profitable we have confined our fishing business entirely to the American waters. The shore Mackerel being of better quality, bring better prices & we take them with Seines, seldom using hook & Lines. 3166 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. We do not in future propose to use English waters for our fishing busi- neSS. We could not ship an American crew for such a purpose. JESSE EI. FREEMAN Agnt Mercantile Wharf Co Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 9th day of May 1877. (Seal.) £º - TEIOMAS FOEMP - i Notary Public No. 97. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Henry Nickerson have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Eight years, at Dennisport and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels having been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº as e º 'º tº e º 'º º ſº tº e º ºs e º 'º tº º Six 6. No. of Trips made ---------------------. & as as a g º as e s is a G & us dº e º 'º' s tº e Five No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . & as a s is & Xº e ºs e s e º 'º º tº ſº is tº ºn a º In ODG No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . IlOIle No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In OD16, Il OIlé Average Value of Vessels each -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $6000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. ...... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $2500 Average value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $625. to Each vessel Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . $40. Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $250. to Each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-house, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. $12.000 Number of Vessels, lost Value of Vessels lost, including outfits Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $2.50 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores... none Total Value of Mackerel do - - - - - - - -, - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OIſle Average market value of American Shore Mackerel. $16.00 $12.00 $8.00 Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OIle Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year.. $150. at our place Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies --------------------------------------------------- nothing Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... nothing Amount paid to British fishermen as wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Amount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . * e º º ſº º ºs º ºn e º ºs º º is nothing Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish - . * , Grand Bank & Georges Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Cape May to Mount Desert Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €TIOS - For the past Eight years I confine my business to American waters entirely. HENRY NICKERSON Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Eleventh day of May 1877 (Seal.) - SAMUEL S BAKER Notary Public. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 31.67 Q No. 98. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Nel son & Harlow have been engaged in the fishing business for the past 25 years, at Plymouth and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed.----------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4. No. of Trips made No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands Average value of Vessels each - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $.3000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . 1550 for each Vessel A Verage Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * g g º ºs e º sa e us as sº * * * * 2000 Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo $35 to 40 per month Average value of Commissions, &c. Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore... $5500 Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- - - - - - - - None Value of Vessels lost, including outfits - Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ----- None Number of Lives lost . . . . . 'e º sº tº dº sº tº sº an e º 'º - ~, ºn e º se sº ºn sº e s tº as sº º & Gº dº sº as º ºs º ºs None Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, spliting, Salting, &c., per bbl. y Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores .... None Total Value of Mackerel do. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None, Average market value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . $3500 Average market value of Bay Mackerel A Verage earnings of the operative fishermen per year Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies----------------------------------------------. $650 per year Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 Amount paid to British fishermen as wages ... . . . . . . . . in 6 years 20.000 Amount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.50 Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Banks of Newfoundland Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - Chiefly on our own Coast & Banks Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries & The Vessels from this place are with one or two exceptions wholly en- gaged in Codfishing and their fishing grounds are the Banks of New- foundland they resort to the Port in the Br Provinces for Bait and some articles for Supplies, a large portion of the crews are Br subjects and in many cases the entire crews are from Nova Scotia. No Fish from this port are caught in Br Waters and We do not con- sider there is any so valuable fishing grounds in their waters for Cod as the Banks of Newfoundland or any fishing ground for Mackerel as on 60ULT i. Coast and we never send vessels in the Waters there or should wish to. * “... WILLIAM H. NELSON. 31.68 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 62 Sworn and subscribed to before me, this eleventh day of May 1877 . (Seal.) ARTHUR LOW • Notary Public No. 99. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Manter & Blackmer have been engaged in the fishing business for the past fif- teen years, at Plymouth Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, So called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . ..s º a º ºs º an e º e s as ºn tº a º ºr sº as a s we e º – . . . . Four (4) No of Trips made - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 Yearly to each vessel No. Of Trips to Bay St Lawrence - No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . $1,200 yearly to each vessel Average Value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $100 to each vessel Average value of Captains' and Crews’ time, viz., wages per mo & $35 primonth Average Value of Commissions, &c. - . . . . . . . . . . . $80 prºvessel each year Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c for curing and packing, in- cluding expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore $7.000 yearly Number of Vessels lost Value of Vessels lost, including outfits Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., Peº 1.00 Tº Value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per b Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores Total value of Mackerel do. Average market value of American Shore Mackerel Average market value of Bay Mackerel Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year . . . . . . . . . . . . $200. Average amount paid in British ports for bait. ice, and various supplies $500, yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring A mount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs - - Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish. . . Grand-Bank, Georgies, Quero, St Peters and all banks bordering on Gulf Stream Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel From Cape Henry to Newfoundland Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . NO value Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken Facts as to change in location and mode of conducting American Fish- €1216S In former years we used to send our vessels to the Bay of St. Law- rence : but not finding it successful we send now to deep water banks : Such as Grand, Georgies & Quero banks. MANTER & BLACKMER * By PRINCE MANTER Sworn & Subscribed, to before me, this sixteenth day of May 1877 (Seal.) - ARTHUR LOW Notary Public AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3169. No. 100. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Abra- ham H. Tower, have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Eifty years, at Cohasset, Mass. and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Five No. of Trips made. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . Six yearly, in all 30 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '• - - - - None No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . None No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Four thousand dollars. Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c.. Twenty five hundred dollars. Average value of Insurance. . . . Two hundred & fifty dollars per Vessel. Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo Thirty dollars Average value of Commissions, &c. ... Two hundred dollars per Vessel. Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore - Five thousand dollars. Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ºr se tº s. ſº tº dº sº sº None— Value of Vessels lost, including Outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0— Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., a e e s - ~ * * * * * * •e e º ſº e º ºr º ... 0– Number of Lives lost. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . None. Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, Salting, &c. per cwt. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - tWO dollars Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores - - Nothing, none taken Total value of Mackenel do - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . € $ 64 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel - Eight dollars per Barrel Average market value of Bay Mackerel Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year One hundred & fifty dollars. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ------- as s s = e a we s = º s. s. s a s an e s is a s r. Nothing Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . { % Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - { % Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “ Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Locations frequented by American vessel for Mackerel Capes Delaware to Mount Desert. Actual value of fish in the water, before taking & Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken. . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €TIOS Eor the last seven or Eight years our Mackerel fishermen have been limited to the catch off the American Coast, owing to the Bay of St Lawrence fishery being so very uncertain, as to offer no encouragement to go there—My vessels have not been there during that period— ABRAHAM H TOWER Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Eighth day of May 1877 J Q A LOTHEOP Justice of the Peace 199 F. 317 () AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 101. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of John JBates has been engaged in fishing business for the past. Thirtyfive years, at Cohasset Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Seven No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- - - - - - - - Six yearly in all 42 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In ODG, No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OIſle No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not in- cluding Magdalene Islands Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Five thousand dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . Three thousand dollars Average value of Insurance - >. t Three hundred dollars yearly for each vessel Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. - Thirty dollars Average value of Commissions, &c. - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . $200 prvessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore... $7000. Number of Vessels lost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ODG Value of Vessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5000 Value of Fsh lost Number of Lives lost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IlOIl 6 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, Splitting, Salting, &c., per bbl . . . . . . -- an a ºn is tº º is as tº g º ºs º º is a s tº a tº º ºs º as ºs s as tº dº º cº we as two dollars pr]Barrel Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores... nothing Total value of Mackerel do - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - no receipts Average market value of American Shore Mackerel e eight dollars pr]Barrel Average market-value of Bay Mackerel g Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year one hundred & fifty dollars Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nothing Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . nothing Amount paid in British ports for repairs. - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “ Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Locations frequented by American Vessels for Mackerel Cape Henlopen to Mount Desert Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . very uncertain Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . {{ {{ Facts as to changes in location and mode of Conducting American fish- €1°16S Eor the last seven years mackerel have been so scarce and uncer- tain in the Bay of Saint Lawrence I have been obliged to abandon the fishery in those waters JOHN BATES Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Seventh day of May 1877 J. Q. A. LOTHROP Justice of the Peace AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION 3171 No. 102. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Baker & Ellis have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Twenty Five years, at Dennisport, Mass—and that since the Washing- . so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: - No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ten No. of Trips made.... . . . . . . . . . . . . Six trips each yearly total 60 trips No. of trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . "es & a s = e º ºs e º 'º a s m sº is Il OIlê No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . 11One No of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands-------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IłOIl 6, Il OIlê Average value of Vessels each.. Six Thousand Dollars each “average” Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. Three Thousand 46 {{ & 4 A Verage value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Four Hundred Dollars each Average Value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo . * $40. per month Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200. Each Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore - Tourteen Thousand Dollars— Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OD 6) Value of Vessels lost, including outfits Value of Fish lost * Number of Lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt - IFifty cts. prowt Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl ----------------------------------- * * * * * * tWO Dollars — Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores.... none Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ‘s s = e = * * ~ e Ił OD10 1 2 3 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel. . . . . . . . 16–10–8 Average market value of Bay Mackerel Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year - Two Hundred & Fifty Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies A mount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages A mount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel . 8 Nothing East of Mt. Desert — Actual value of Fish in the water before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water before taken - Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’leS About 15. years ago we sent our. last vessels to the Gulf of St Law- rence for fish the business being unprofitable. and vessels not Paying expenses. since which time we have found it much to our advantage to fish on our own shores—it is impossible to get a native crew to go to the Gulf of St Lawrence fishing—one of our last trips there absent about 11 Weeks only took twenty Bbls of fish valued less than two hundred Dollars seventeen men being employed—Seining has taken place of wº 3172 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Hand line fishing on our own coasts and we find that it is greatly to our advantage to fish nearer home. it being more advantageous. our own fish being worth more than those taken in British waters and much Quicker sales and much more profitable business. BAKER & ELLIS Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 21st day of May 1877 (Seal) SAMUEL S. BAKER Notary Public No. 103. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Levi IEldridge have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Twenty years, at South Chatham and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . Eight $8 No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . -- . . . . . --------------- ... 3 to Each vessel 1872 1873 1874. IS75 1876 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . () () 0 () 0 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In OD16) No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . Il OD 6) Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . '- - - - - - - - - - - gº tº gº º ſº sº º tº $5600. Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . - sº e º ſº * * * * * * * $2500. Average value of Insurance. . . . . . . e º ºs e º is tº sº e º is sº º ºs º an us a s $568 each vessel Average value of Captains' and Crews’ time, viz., wages per mo * $35 Pr]\[onth Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $175 to each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore . . $7.500. Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One Vessel Value of Vessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... • * * - s = • * * $6500. Value of Fish lost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $800 Number of Lives lost. . . . . • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - e > * * * * ~ * - - - Three Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 75c $2.00 Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, sº per bbl . . . . . . . . . * * * * * *e sº sº e º sº as sº e s m ºr sº º is tº º ºs sº º is sº sº as sº º is sº e º ºs e º gº tº º sº º ºs º ºs ºr 2.00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores . . . . none Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * DOI), © Average market value of American Shore Mackerel... $16.00 12.00 8.00 Average market value of Bay Mackerel Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . $130. each Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies - - - - - - - * * * * * * sº º ºs º º ºs sº tº * * * * * * * * * * tº ſº sº º sº, sº ºn ºn e º º ºx º' tº ºn tº ºr e º 'º - nothing Amount paid to British fishermen for herring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OI) {} Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OI).0 Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Western Bank Quereau & G. Bank Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - from Cape May to Mt. Desert Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €T16S We think it is not profitable for us to send our vessels to fish in Brit- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 317.3 ish waters—we confine our business to American waters entirely our business is confined strictly to Shore fishing as it pays us we think much better than Bay fishing would LEVI ELDRIDGE Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Eleventh day of May 1877 (Seal.) SAMUEL S BAKER e Motary Public No. 104. Q 3. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of D. F. Weekes have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Seven years, at So. Harwich and that since the Washington Treaty, So called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . average of three per, year No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 to banks and six to 8 Mackerel No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DOIſle No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IlOD16) No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not in- cluding Magdalene Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . --- - - - - - - - - - - 46 Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Five thousand dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . TWO thousand “ A Verage Value of Insurance . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Six hundred { % Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo - forty dollars per Month. Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . Two hundred and Twenty five Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Six Thousand dollars Number of Vessels lost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TWO Value of Vessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . . . . . ten thousand dollars Value of Fish lost. ----------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - fifteen hundred “ Number of lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - One dollar Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl ------------------------------- , º º sº as tº as e º ºs º mº º sº e * * * * * * tWO dollars Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . . Il OIle Totel Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... * * * * * * * * * ... • * * * * * * * * * ITOI).0 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel. . . . $16. $12. $8.00 A Verage market Value of Bay Mackerel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OD16) Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year - about one hundred & fifty Dollars Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies. nothing Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages 1870 1871. 1872 $800. $600. $1400. nothing since A mount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish * Grand bank Westirn & George Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel • Cape May to Mt Desert Actual Value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual Value of Mackerel in the water, before taken. . . . . . . . . . . nothing 3174. AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- ©TIOS The Bay St. Lawrence fishing entirely abandoned by those engaged in the fishing business here and all confine themselves to the shore fish- ing & Georges Bank for mackerel as the greater outlay and long time used on the trips to the bay is so much that it is impossible carry on that fishing and from the present appearence of things our shore fishing will be in the hand of British hands as their cheaper vessels, and cheaper hire of crew's, and outfits enable them to place the fish in our markets at a rate to us disasterous 3. • - - D. F. WEEKES Sworn and subscribed to before me, this twelvth day of May 1877 (Seal.) SAMUEL S BAKER * Notary Public No. 105. - This is certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Caleb Small have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Twenty seven years, at South Harwich Mass and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Five one & two trips yearly to each vessel to No. of Trips made..... * * * * * the Banks 8 or 10 trips Shore mackerelling No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OD 63 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OD10 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands---------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IlOſle Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Five Thousand dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . 2500 to each vessel yearly A Verage Value of Insurance - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $200. Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. Capt 70 Crews $40 each A Verage Value of Commissions, &c. - - - ... -- - - - - - - - - - - $200 each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore $12000 Twelve Thousands Number of Vessels lost. . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -none Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DOT16 Value of Fish lost. -----------------------------------------. - $4000 Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Oſle, Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. - One dollar Tº value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, sº per bl.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - • - - - - - - - - e s - - a s a s w = • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2,00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . . none Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OIl6 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel no 1 $16 no 2 $12 no 3 $7,50 cts Average market value of Bay Mackerel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none caught Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . . . $200 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies years 1873 & 1874 $500 each year nothing since Amount paid to British fishermen for herring. . . . . . . . . year 1873 $1000 Amount paid to British fishermen as wages.... Average $500 yearly— AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3.175 Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3 tº is º is s s a Il O Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Af Western Bank Banquereu Bank Grand Bank Locations frequently by American vessels for Mackerel Erom Cape Henry to Mt Desert Bank Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken - - - - - - - - - - nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €TIOS Have sent no vessels to the Bay of St Laurence for the last eight years excepting one vessel to Boone Bay for a load of Herrings in 1873 It will not pay to send vessels to the Bay of St Laurence for mackerel the catch is so uncertain and expence so large It is a Bad place to Seine fish on account of shallow water and foul Bottom The Cod fishery is an entirely Bank fishery owing no allegince to any govenment. The Western Bank Quereaw and Grand Bank being from 100 miles to 400 miles from any land CALEB SMALL Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Twelvth day of May 1877 (Seal.) SAMUEL. S. BAKER Notary Public No. 106. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Wal- entine Doane have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Thirty Eight years, at Harwich Port and that since the Washington . So called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as OILOWS : No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *g, *g, sº tº º ſº tº º ºs º º º me º 'º º * @ re e s a º Seven No. of Trips made.. Cod fisherman 2 Trips Yearly mackl fishern 8 to 10 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence..... tº e º ze e s as º is . . . . none Since 1862 — No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence...... . . . . . . . . Il OI!6) No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands----------------------------------------- In OIle Average value of Vessels each........ about 3,000 To .12000 dollar Each Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c.. $3000 To Each Vessal Yearly Average Value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $225 Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo Captn $68 Crews 30 Each AVerage Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $120 Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore $11000 Eleven Thousand Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Four Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . $4800 Each—Total $19.200 Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3,000 Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... Eleven— Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per * 0 Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, Salting, &c. per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ---. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ------------- 1,80 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores . . . . none Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IłOD16, A Verage market value of American Shore Mackerel No 1. 17—No 10 No 3. 6.25 3176 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Caught Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . . $180 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and Various Sup- plies. . . . . . • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * a v - - - - - * * s • * ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * In OIlê Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I] Oſle Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish |From Cape Charles to Mt. Desert Locations frequented by American ves. Sels for Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “ £ 6 & 4 4% 4% Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . “ Facts as to change in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’leS bave Sent no vessels To Fish. In British Waters for the Last fifteen Years our Fishing since 1862 has wholly been done In American Waters as no American crews Would go To Fish In Bayst Laurance or any British Waters those that have occasionally Tried made a failur and serious losses to owner & outfitters & crews—consequently our Fishing is wholly carried on In American Waters. - k VALENTINE. DOANE Sworn and subscribed to before me this Ninth day of May 1877 (Seal.) SAMUEL. S. BAKER ^, Notary Public No. 107. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of T. B. Baker have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Eleven years, at Harwich Port and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... is a gº ºn e º a se - as a we we ºf Five No. of Trips made. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Six No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . - - - - - * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not in- cluding Magdalene Islands. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None A Verave value of Véssels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six Thousand Dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c....Twenty five Hundred “ A Verage Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . ** * * * * * * * * * Two do fifty “ Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo - Thirty dollars per mo Average value of Commissions, &c. ....Two Hundred Twenty five dollars Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Ten thousand dollars Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . * ºn tº º º ºs ºn tº gº ºn tº sº tº * * * * ... none Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . do Number of Lives lost. . . . . .------------------------------------ TWO Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl ------------------------------------------------ Three dollars Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . sº e º nº e is ºn g º sº sºn a se e s sº a P sº º is sº º ºs º ºs In OC AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3177 1S 2S 3 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel...... 14 × 9 × 7 Average market value of Bay Mackerel - Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year....Two Hundred Twenty five dollars Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies --------------------------------------------------. nothing Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . { % Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 * A mount paid in British ports for repairs. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . { % Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish. . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - Nothing east of Mt. Desert Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual Value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . tº we me 46 Facts aS to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €TIOS Not considering fishing in British waters remunerative Have sent no Vessells to Bay of St Lawrence since have been in business - T. B. BAKER Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 21st day of May 1877 (Seal.) SAMUEL. S. BAKER - | Notary Public NO. 108. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of V. Doane Jr & Co. have been engaged in the fishing business for the past ten years, at Portsmouth N. H. and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * g º sº gº * , sº tº gº gº ºn e º ºs º º Ten No. of Trips made each season. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fifty No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... is ºn tº gº º 'º tº None No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six thousand dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c each season, including Boats & Seines: $2500. = Average value of Insurance. . . . . Twenty-five Hundred dolls per season Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo - $390. for time employed Average value of Commissions, &c....Two Thousand dolls per season Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Nine thousand dolls per year Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . ſº us ºn se is ſº e º sº ºr 4 s º a sº ºn e s sº e º sº we s = * * * * * tWO Value of Vessels lost, including outfits . . . . . Eighteen thousand dollars Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ---- None Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per ©Wt - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nominal Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., Per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One dollar Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . Nothing Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . tº º ºs e ºn a º ºs ºn a se it sº or ºn tº sº tº a sº e Nothing 31.78 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION Average market value of American Shore Mackerel Eight dollars per Bbl. Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None received Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year One hundred & fifty dolls per season Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies --------------------------------------. Five Hundred dollars Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Twenty five Hundred dollars annually Amount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . . . . . Two thousand dolls. Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Grand & Western Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel...Not acquainted Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . Mothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries. But very little change in location on American Shores. A grand change made in mode of taking Mackerel, being: from hook & line, to. purse Seining, largely increasing expense The scarcity and poor quality of Mackerel in British waters. has induced parties fishing there, to transfer their fleet to our own shore fishing. And it is not uncommon to See English vessels on this coast engaged in fishing with modern appliances, being found more profitable than their own Coast fishing and We have sold several cargo's of cured fish the past two years to go to Halifax N. S. W. DOANE J R & CO. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 31 day of May 1877. (Seal.) A. F. HOWARD Notary Public. No. 109. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of C. Morris Tredick have been engaged in the fishing business for the past five years, at Portsmouth N H and that since the Washington Treaty, So called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. --... --- - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... e º e º ºs Fifteen No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sixty 1875 1876 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 1. No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence... none, but Cod fish No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands. . . . . - ºne º º ºs º ºs º ºs º a sº e as e = e s sº tº º is ºn e º sº tº ºr tº gº º sº DOIle AVerage Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Three thousand dollars Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c..... Twelve hundred dollars AVerage Value of Insurance - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --. 9% Average Value of Captains' and Crews’ time, viz., wages per mo. Thirty five dollars Average value of Commissions, &c..... one hundred and fifty dollars Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Twenty thousand dollars Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . Seven thousand dolla. TS Value of Fish lost e Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3.179 Number of Lives lost - Total Value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. * 75G. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bl ------------------------------------------------- two dollars. Total Value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores . . . . none Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *d ºr e ºn us s - e º ºs ºr * IlOIl62 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel...... $16. $12. $8. Average market value of Bay Mackerel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12, $8. $6. Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year Two hundred & fifty dollars. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies. Six hundred dollars yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - | Three thousand dollars yearly Amount paid to British fishermen as ! Wages | Amount paid in British ports for re. pairs M Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish La Have, Grand & Western Bank Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Cape May to Bay St. Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking ......... . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken... . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries Within last three years have not had any vessels engaged in Fishing in British Waters either for Cod or Mackerel. The Mackerel fishing being done on the Coast of the United States, and the Cod fishing on Grand La Have and Western Banks, vessels resorting to British Wa- ters only for Bait and ice. The Gulf of St. Lawrence fishing of no ac- COUnt. - C. MORRIS TREDICEQ. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 19th day of May 1877. (Seal.) A. F. EIOW ARD Notary Public. No. 110. This is to certify, That the undersigned, James Frye have been en- gaged in the fishing business, for the past twenty seven years, at North Haven & Camden, Me. and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, my vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Five (5) 13 men each No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . --------. ... four trips yearly, each vessel No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IlOIle) No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. - - - - - - - - - - - - - IlOIle; No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands. ----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------ Il OD10 Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c...... $2000 yearly each vessel Average Value of Insurance. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9 per cent Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo.... $35 AVerage Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200 each vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. .310,000 3180 - Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Number of Vessels lost Value of Vessels lost, including outfits Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost , , + Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 75 cts Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, sº per bbl -------------------------------------. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. ... none Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il Oſle A Verage market value of American Shore Mackerel. . . . . . . . 16. 12–8 - Average market value of Bay Mackerel A Verage earnings of the Operative fishermen per year . . . . . . . . . . . . $200 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies ------------------------------------------------------- In One Amount paid to British fishermen for herring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IlOIle Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish * Grand & Georges Bank Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - Cape May to Mt. Desert Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water before taken. - - - - - - - - -nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €TIOS - We have sent no fishermen to the Dominion Waters for the past five years for the following reasons namely: the fish have been of poor quality & Scarce and in all that have fished there from this vicinity none have paid their expenses Mackerel on the American shore are plenty and of good quality but the expenses are so high in catching them that We do not consider them worth anything in the water before taken— * JAMES FRYE / STATE of MAINE RNOX SS— * . --- Sworn and subscribed to before me, this second day of June 1877 (Seal.) J. F. STETSON Notary Public No. 111. This is to Certify, That the undersigned Geo. Tolman have been en- gaged in the fishing business, for the past twelve years, at Deer Isle, Maine, and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: viz—since 1866 No. of Vessels employed. . . . . a? in Jºº gº tº 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 * *- 12 13 12 10 8 4 4 4 5 5 5 No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 20 18 20 18 16 8 8 4, 12 16 18 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 16 17 15 13 9 8 6 3 T 0 0 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence... No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28800 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including the Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5000. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 318i Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2700 each yearly Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10% vessel & outfits Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . . $38. Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $150. Average value of Warves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore 76000.00 yearly expenses including pack bill & value of premises No. of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... $23,000,00 Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . --- 17 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per cwt - .75 cts Totol value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per . N.Y.L. sº a s s is s sº a se e º s a s is “ e s we s = . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * {{ Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - { % Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • gº gº º ºs e e s m e º ºs e º ºs e e º sº a dº sº e s m s tº 4. " Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CWt - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *e is º ºs e º Aº º ºs 70 CentS Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, sº per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e se e s = • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2 º' tº ſº tº gº sº $200 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . Nothing Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - “ Average market value of American Shore Mackerel 16. 12. 8 per bll— Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . ... -11. 7. 5 per bll Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . $200,— Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies . $2.500 per annum. Amount paid to British fishermen for herring * Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . $750 per annum— Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . $400. per annum Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish - Grand Bank & Western. Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Cape May to Bay of St Laurence. Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . 66 Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €TI6S My method of doing fishing business has been totally changed within ten year—We fish by trawls and seines— where we used formerly hand lines entirely—Our shore Mackerel bring much larger prices—and men decline to be shipped for the bay if they can get other work—Our Bank fishermen take their fish many miles from any national jurisdiction. º: ALLEN LEWIS 3200 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. STATE OF MAINE. LINCOLN. S.S. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Twenty second day of May 1877 (Seal.) G. B. KENNISTON. Notary Public. No. 128. This is to certify, That the undersigned, Albion P. Hodgdon have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Thirty five years, at Boothbay Me and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- - - - - - - - Five — No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Three 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . 2 3 2 2 2 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence - average trips 150 bbls each No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . as sº as we º e º e s tº e º º º º ſº tº º tº tº not any Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $.5000. Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500 Average value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * tº e º us sº e e º º 9 per cent Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . $35.00 Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $250.00 Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing,. including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore... $20,000 Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . OD 6) Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7,000 Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , e º 'º sº e º ºs º sº e ºn as tº * * * * * * * * * * * $2,000 Number of Lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt - 50 cents per 100 lbs. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl ----------------------. . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * * * * * * * $1.50 per bbl Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . nothing Total Value of Mackerel do ... . . . . . . . . . . -------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - {{ Average market Value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . . . . . 18, 12. 8 Average market value of Bay Mackerel. . . . . . . . .11. 7— 5 per bbl— Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . $200.00 per an. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies $500.00 per an. Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . . . $250. per annum Amount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . $250. “ “ Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish. ... Western Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Cape May to Bay St. Laurece Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken...... . . . . . {{ Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- OrléS The fishing business is become almost wholly changed. from hand- lines to Trawling and seines for mackeral. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3201 Good men cannot be had for Bay fishing and all our fish are taken on the banks far from the jurisdiction of any Government. All vessels sent into the bay of St. Laurence for three years have not paid their bills and I shall send no more— A P HODGDON STATE OF MAINE— LINCOLN S.S. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this twenty-second day of May 1877. (Seal.) G. B. KENNISTON.— Notary Public. No. 129. This is to certify, That the undersigned, Luther Maddocks have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Fifteen years, at Boothbay Me and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, Our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thirteen No. of Trips made - No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing since 1872– No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OD10 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not in- cluding Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * o we s • * * > * & 4 A Verage value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5.000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.500 each A Verage value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . * - a e º is gº sº e as sº e º s sº a 99% per cent Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo . . . . $40 Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $250 Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. $30.000 Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Two (2) Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7.000 each— Value of Fish lost - * Number of Lives lost. -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fourteen Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. - –70 Cents Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, *s. bbl - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 200 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DOIlê Average market value of American Shore Mackerel. 16. 12. 8. per bbl— A Verage market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . 11, 7–5 per bbl— Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year - $225—00 per annum. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies $2.000 per annum— Amount paid to British fishermen for herring. . . . . $1.000— “ A mount paid to British fishermen as wages . . . . . . . . . . $600 { % A mount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . $500– $6 Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Grand, Western & Orpha Banks. Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Cape May to Bay of St. Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . {{ 201 F. 3202 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €TIOS - Our Vessels were formerly wholly engaged in the cod and mackerel fishery—but we were compelled to abandon the business & for five years have been wholly engaged in the Menhaden & Mackeral fishery on our own coast—The bay of St. Laurence fishery, proving, in my experience, a total failure and for that reason we have sent no vessels there for five years—& have taken no fish of any kind within three miles of the shore— STATE OF MAINE - LINGOLN SS B LUTHER MAIDDOCKS. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Twenty second day of May 1877– (Seal.) G. B. KENNISTON - Notary Public. No. 130. This is to certify, That the undersigned, Levi Reed, have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Forty years, at Boothbay, Me—and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our ves- sels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Three No. of Trips made . . . . . . * * * se dº º ºs º dº sº. ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * g e º ºs Three No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . None within five years— No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . None No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DOD 6 Average value of Vessels each - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5500 each Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.500 Average value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . & ºt tº º is as s m = m e s m = * * 10 per cent. Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. * - - - 45 per mo. Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $250 per annum Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors, and labor on shore...#10,000 Number of Vessels lost. - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . , sº tº º sº tº gº º as dº º dº º ºs & IłOIl 6 Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . { % Value of Fish lost --- . . . . . . . . . . . . ----------------------------- {{ Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . { %. Total number of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 centS Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl . . . . . . . . sº gº tº º e º sº ... tº 6 s tº sº º “e sº º sº, sº us ºr us * = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * $1.50 per bbl Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores . . nothing Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% Average market value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 12 8 Average market value of Bay Mackerel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8 6— Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year . . . . . . . . . $225.00 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and Various supplies. -- - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500 per annum. Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . $1000 “ 46 Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . . . $400 “ 4% Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . $200 “ {{ Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish - º Grand Bank & Bradlee. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3203 Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Magdalen Islands — Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in Water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . . . ... “ Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I*16S Business has become so unremunative that I have been compelled to abandon it, so as Bay St. Lawrence. Cath now with seners in ameri- can waters. Never got fish within English jurisdiction but on banks far from shore. LEVI REED STATE OF MAINE LINCOLN S.S. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Twenty-second day of May 1877– - (Seal.) G. B. KENNISTON Notary Public No. 131. This is to certify, That the undersigned, Charles C. Blake have been engaged in the fishing business for the past six years, at Boothbay, Me. and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: - No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Two— No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Two trips each— --- 1873 & 1874 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . 2, — — bbls only. - 116 210 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . not One tenth Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4.500 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * $2,500 Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * 10 per cent Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. $40—per month Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * tº $200– Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Six thousand dollars. Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ** is is a t > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Il OIl{} Value of Vessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (6 Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . {{ Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *, as a sº º º, 46 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per GW't - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 50 cents per 100 lbs. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl . . . . . . . -----. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.00 per bbl. Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores Caught none Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . { % { % Average market value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . . . . 16. 12. 8. Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . 10—6–4, per bbl. Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year Less than $200, per man. 3204 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies. . . . . • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ºf e s as as tº º ºs e º as e 50 per annum— Amount paid to British fishermen for herring .* Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Western Bank | Quero Bank. Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel. coast of Maine Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . - {{ Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- GI’I6S send my vesels to the banks as above—within no jurisdiction of any government—Have sent two vessels to Bay St L. and both made fail- ures—Now Seine for Meckerel off our own coast— Shall never send vessels to the bay. as it does not pay. C C BLAKE Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Twenty Third day of May 1877 (Seal.) G. B. KENNISTON Notary Public. No. 132. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Mc- Dougall & Race have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Twenty-Two years, at Boothbay. Maine and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ten No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Three trips each— No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 - 20 15 10 10 4 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence - - - 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 5,000 2.000 1.500 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . not one tenth Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4,000 Average value of Outfits, Salt Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500 Average Value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . • e º an º º ſº e s ºf a tº a º Aº a w ºf 9 per cent Average value of Captains' and Crews' time viz., wages per mo. . $40— Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $250– Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Fifteen Thousand dollars. Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * Three— Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . Thirteen Thousand Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.000 Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . s us ºn a s ºr e s ºf ºn a e º ºs • * is a ºn a * * * * Ten Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CWt . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 76 cents pe 100 lbs— Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, Salting, &c., per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $1.50— Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores...Nothin g Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . $º e = e º s º t. e s is e is $300 per annum AWARD OF THE • FISHERY COMMISSION. 3205 Average market value of American Shore Mackerel . . . . . . . . . 18–12. 6. Average market value of Bay Mackerel. . . . . . . . . . . . 11. 8. 6—per bbl— A Verage earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . ... $225, – Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $900—per annum — Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . $300 “ € $ Amount paid to British fishermen as wages. . . . . . . $1,000.-4: { % A mount paid in British ports for repairs - Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Grand — & Western Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Cape May to Bay St. Law. Actual value of fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . Less than nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken ... “ “ { % Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’leS We have now dissolved partner ship—and the business cannot be profitably conducted. Fishing was profitable only during the excite- ment of the war—Never caught any fish within the jurisdiction of any government except American— Fishing is conducted now by trowling & with Seines. - SIMON MCDOUGALL - JAMES L RACE STATE OF MAINE– LINCOLN S.S. is.” and subscribed to before me, this twenty-second day of May 77. \ (Seal.) G. B. KENNISTON, Notary Public. In the Bay of St. Lawrence in the years 1875 & 1876 the business of fishing was so unprofitable that we send none this year. It is impossible to get good fishermen to ship for such voyages— JAMES L RACE STATE OF MAINE– LINCOLN S. s. Personally appeared James L. Race on this Twenty second day of May A. D. 1877. and made oath to the truth of the above statement by him subscribed— - (Seal.) G. B. KENNISTON - Notary Public. No. 133. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of S. Nickerson & Sons have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Eleven years, at Boothbay. Me. and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: Ne. of Vessels employed. - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Four. No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . average six trips each— - 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . 2 2 0 0 .0 1872 1873 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . 300 300 3206 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ. ing Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I). On 6 Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5.000– Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1.800– Average value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9 per cent Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. $40.00 per mo. Average Value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200– Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on Shore. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- - - - . . . . . $15.000 Number of Vessels lost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - One Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * $8.000.00 Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ---------------------- - - - - - - $800,— Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In On 6 Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per CW't -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . 75 cents—per 100 Weight Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * $200 per bbl— Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . nothing Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “ Average market value of American Shore Mackerel - 16. 12 & 8 per bbl— Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. 6—5 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year . . . . . . . . . . . . $250 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $1,000– Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages . . . . . . $300.00 per annum— Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . $300.00 per annum. Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish * Grand Banks—Western Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - now off our own coast. Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . 44 Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries The chang has been almost entire in our business—in a few years. Since 1873 we have sent no vessels to St. Lawrence after Mackeral be- cause it does not pay. Could not ship a crew—none of our vessels take fish within the limits of the Dominion—all are caught on the Banks many miles from any National Jurisdiction. STEPEIEN NICKERSON STEPHEN E. NICKERSON ALONZO R, NICEQERSON STATE OF MAINE \ LINCOLN. S. S. ſ Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Twenty second day of May 1877. g - (Seal.) G. B. KENNISTON Notary Public. No. 134. * This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of John McClintock & Co. have been engaged in the fishing business for the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. * 3207 past Forty-Three years, at Boothbay and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . 4 a gº tº e º us ºn e s sº tº dº tº a es us is tº sº us … Eight—(8) No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Trips each vessel yearly average. No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . one { % 66 { % av. each 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 250 125 100 0 , each— No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore no. including Magdalene Islands none except near Modeline Is. A Verage value of Vessels each . . . . . . Jº º ºs e s m as sº * * * * * * * * * * average $5.000 . Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “ $2.500 AVerage Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . about 9 per cent Average value of Captains’ and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo e $40.00 per mo— Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . , ºr a sº me tº as ſº ºn sº - sº sº sº sº as ºr sº * $225.— Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore $20,000.- Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ------------------------ Two— Value of Vessels lost including outfits. . . . . Fourteen Thousand dollars. Value of Fish lost. -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - * * * * * $2,000– Number of Lives lost -----. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DOD 6 CW't -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -70.C. Seventy cents Tº value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, sº per blº -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . -------------------- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2.00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. nothing Total value of Mackerel do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . { % Average market value of American Shore Mackerel. 16. 10. 8–per bbl Average market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . 11. 8. 6—per bbl— Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . $200.00 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * $1.000 yearly— A mount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . $1.500 “ A mount paid to British fishermen as wages . . . . . . . . . . . $1.500 ($ Amount paid in British ports for repairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $500.-4: Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Grand & Western Banks. Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel z Cape May to bay St Lawrence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I'10S We have had vessells engaged in cod fishing generally and macker- alling off our shore—The bay fishing has decreased in value each year for five years till it is now worthless—We sent none in 1876 & shall send none 1877. On this coast our vessells fish for mackeral using seines generally since Mackeral caught here are worth 40 per cent more than Bay Mackeral—Our fish are taken on the Banks far from shore outside of any National jurisdiction W G McCLINTOCK JOEIN BL MCCLINTOCEQ } 3208 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. STATE OF MAINE– LINCOLN S. S. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Twenty second day of May 1877 (Seal.) J. G. B. KENNISTON Notary Public No. 135. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of Mi- chewl. Stinson have been engaged in the fishing business for the past twenty years, at Swans Island and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 6 No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 e º 'º º ºs e ºn - e º we dº nº e º sº tº ſº º & º Aº 6 per year No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . none for 8 years No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a tº tº dº e º e s is ºr $3,000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2000 per year Average Value of Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 € 4. Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages mo... 35. Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 per year Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore $6000 Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * & gº tº e º 'º - ºg º sº tº º Aº gº º a º ºs º gº Oil 6, Value of Vessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2500 Value of Fish lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * 1800. Number of Lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per cwt 1.00 Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . --- - - - - - - - - - - 250 Total value of Fish taken. Within three miles of British shores Total value of Mackerel do. Average market Value of American Shore Mackerel. . . . . . . . . . 1. ; : Average market Value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8 6. Average earnings of the Operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . 350. Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various supplies Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish . . . . Western Bank Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Actual value of Fish in the Water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . - nothing Facts as to changes iu location and mode of conducting American fish- ©TIOS - Have formerly been largely engaged in Mackereling in Bay St Law- rence say 8 years ago since have been seining off our own shores You left the Bay fishing because we could not pay our expenses do not consider the Bay of St Ilaurence fishery of any value whatever can- not pay for our out fits this is the experience of all fishermen at Swans AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3209 Island cannot ship a Crew to go to the Bay on Shares every vessel that went there 8 years ago lost money - MICHAEL STINSON Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 15 day of May 1877 (Seal.) F T. BABSON Coll of Customs Dist of Gloucester No. 136. This is to certify, That the undersigned Lewis McDonald have been engaged in the fishing business, for the past Ten years, at North Haven Maine, and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . 12, & fit 18 others engaged as below No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ºs tº fle & © tº gº è tº gº • 4 tº tº º sº tº . . . . . . . . . . .5 No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . lsº lsº lsº lsº lſº No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. * Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . tº º Aº, º gº tº gº - * * tº e & 700 700 650 200 0 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Not One Barrel in Ten Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3,500 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . $2,000 each Vessel Average value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * 9 per ct Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo . . . . $35 Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $200 each Vessel Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. $10,000 Number of Vessels lost Value of Vessels lost, including outfits ' Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt 50 CtS Totol value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $2,00 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores Total value of Mackerel do •, AVerage market value of American Shore Mackerel. . . . . . . . 16. 12. 8 AVerage market value of Bay Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. 7. 5 . A Verage earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . . . $250 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies. ----- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - * * * * * * * * * s a " is e = * * & as us sº dº we & $1500 Yearly Amount paid to British fishermen for herring - A mount paid to British fishermen as wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $500 Yearly Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for fish. . . . . . Western Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Cape May Bay St Laurence Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water before taken . . . . . . * * * * * { % Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fisheries I have not made it a paying business sending Wessels into the Bay of St Laurence for Mackerel. for the last 5 Years. Last year sent none 3210 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. : there the Vessels cannot pay expenses I have therefore abandoned the Business at that point and confine my Vessels to the Ocean Banks for fish and off our own shores for Mackerel using Seines & Trauls LEWIS MCDONALD Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 25 day of May 1877 (Seal.) F T BABSON Collector of Customs Dist Of Gloucester No. 137. This is to certify, That the undersigned C Wasgatt & Company have been engaged in the fishing business for the past Sixteen years, at Swans Island Maine, and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: Namely since 1866 - No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ten (10) 14 men to each Vessel No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . five trips yearly each year No. of Trips to Bay St Lawrence 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874, 1875 1876 6 00 00 00 1 00 00 00 00 00 00 1866 No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St Lawrence 900 Bls 200 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands . . . . . . None caught within three miles of Shore Average Value of vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2200 Average value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 per cent on Vessel & Outfits Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. . . . $32 Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . $225 to each Captain yearly Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore - *. $2500 yearly Number of vessels lost Value of vessels lost, including outfits Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per CW't - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... º ºs e º 'º º is 80 otS . Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, sº ; bbl - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------ 2.2 Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . nothing Total Value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Average market value of American Shore Mackerel No 1's 16 No 2 11 No 3 7.50 Average market value of Bay Mackerel “ “ 11 “ “ 7 “ “ 5.25 Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year. . . . . . . . . . . . $225 Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies - - - - - - - - - - ----------" * * * > . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 12005 Amount paid to British fishermen for herring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 1000$ Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid to British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish - Cape May to Gulf of St Lawrence Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . * * * * * * * Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water before taken . . . . . . . . . . 6 : AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3211 Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- ©I'10S When I, in the year 1861 became engaged in the fishing business, the Bay of St. Lawrence was considered the best fishing ground for mack- erel, and I sent my vessels there, but the business was not remunerative. In the Spring of 1867 I concluded I had lost enough money there. Since that time none that I have controlled have gone there (One of which I owned a part went, I think, in 1870 but she did not pay her bill.) Since abandoning the Bay of St. Lawrence the business has, with me, been re- munerative, I own four times the tonnage and value now that I did in 1867. Not one of our Captains or crews have to my recollection, even proposed a trip to the Bay within the last five years - C WASGATT Sworn and subscribed to before me, this Sixth day of June 1877 - THOMAS WARREN, Justice of the Peace: STATE OF MAINE. HANCOCK, ss. I, Hutson B. Saunders, Clerk of the Supreme Judicial Courts, in said County, certify that Thomas Warren Esquire is and was at the date of his Certificate an acting Justice of the Peace, in and for said County, duly commissioned and qualified to act as such, and that the signature to the paper annexed, purporting to be his, is genuine, and that he is Čiuly authorized and empowered, by the laws of said State, to take ac- knowledgment of Deeds, Assignments, and Powers of Attorney, and to administer oaths. In Testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my Hand and affixed the Seal of the Supreme Judicial Court, for said State, this Sixth day of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy- Seven (Seal.) - HUTSON B SAUNDERS Oley le. NO. 138. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of James Fitch of N London Conn have been engaged in the fishing business for the past twenty years, at New London Conn and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * @ tº º a º ºr s tº º Ten. No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . --- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eight No. of Trips to Bay. St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sº he w- tº as tº e Il OIle No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ITOIT 69 No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In OIl 6) Average value of Vessels each. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Three Thousand Dolls Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . Two Thousand Dolls A Verage Value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nine per cent Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo e * Thirty five Dolls Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Two EIundred Dolls Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, in- cluding expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Twenty Thousand Dolls 3212 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On 6 Value of Wessels lost, including outfits . . . . . . . Three Thousand Dollars Value of Fish lost . . . . . . * * * * * * * * ~ * ºn tº a º ºs e º e º º is ºr es sº sº * * * * ... • e < e < * * * Il OI)0 Number of Lives lost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Six Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per cwt. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl. Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . none Total value of Mackerel do. Average market value of American Shore Mackerel Average market value of Bay Mackerel Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year Two Hundred & fifty Dolls Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various Sup- plies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . yearly one Hundred Dolls Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish ! - Georges & Lahave Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel - Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’leS - Our vessels are engaged mostly in the Halibut & Cod Fisheries Some of them have tried down to the Bay of Fundy & have proved a failure. for this reason we confine our fishing to the American waters & the Ocean Banks not using the British waters for any fishing whatever JAMES FITCH Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 17th day of May 1877 (Seal.) - ...” C. G. SISTARE Notary Public No. 139. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of C A Weaver & Co New London Conn have been engaged in the fishing busi- ness for the past 35 years, at New London Conn and that since the Washington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been employed as follows: No. of Vessels employed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 No. of Trips made. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sº tº gº º ſº tº $ & Cº. Eight No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IlOI) e. No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DOD 6) No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not including Magdalene Islands - . . . . . . . . . . * - sº ºn e º nº an º º ºs º ºs e º º sº ſº cº º - - - - - - - - - - - Il OI) e. Average Value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4000 Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3000 Average value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nine per cent Average value of Captains’ and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo... Forty Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Four Hundred Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore Twenty Thousand doll Number of Vessels lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . & as a sº a º ſº 3. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3213 Value of Vessels lost, including outfits..….......... $14000,— Value of Fish lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v. e º ºs e º ºs º ºs º & 1200– Number of Lives lost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Il OD 6) Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c. per cwt. Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, Salting, &c., per bbl. Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores . . . . none Total value of Mackerel do. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . { % Average market value of American Shore Mackerel Average market value of Bay Mackerel Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year Two Hundred & fifty doll Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and Various sup- plies. -- . . . . . . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 300 dollors yearley Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as Wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 doll yearley Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish - Georges Browns Lahove & Western banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Actual value of Fish in the Water, before taking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- €I’IOS ^. •º our vessalls are engaged mostley in the Halibut and Cod fisheries we have sent our vessols in the the Bay of Funday the trips have proved a failure in almost every trip for this reason we confine our fisheries to the oacean banks out side of oney national jurisdiction and Our Own Shores - O A. WEAVER. & CO Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 17th day of May 1877. (Seal.) j C. G. SISTARE Notary Public No. 140. This is to certify, That the undersigned, composing the firm of H. A Brown & Co of New London Conn have been engaged in the fishing business for Ten years at New London Conn and that since the Wash- ington Treaty, so called, has been in effect, our vessels have been em- ployed as follows: - No. of Vessels employed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ten No. of Trips made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eight No. of Trips to Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None No. of Barrels of Mackerel from Bay St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * None No. of Barrels of Mackerel caught within 3 miles of shore, not includ- ing Magdalene Islands. -- - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . None Average value of Vessels each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Four Thousand Average value of Outfits, Salt, Bait, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Three Thousand Average value of Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . tº * * * * * * * * p * * * * : * * * Nine per cent Average value of Captains' and Crews' time, viz., wages per mo. Thirty five Average value of Commissions, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . Two FIundred Dollars Average value of Wharves, Fish-houses, &c., for curing and packing, including expenses of Clerks, Proprietors and labor on shore. Twenty Thousand Dollars Number of Vessels lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Five 3214 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Value of Vessels lost, including outfits. . . . . . . Thirty Thousand Dollars Value of Fish lost Number of Lives lost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Twenty Five Total value of Fish taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per cwt Total value of Mackerel taken, before curing, splitting, salting, &c., per bbl * Total value of Fish taken within three miles of British shores. . . . . None Total value of Mackerel do. Average market value of American Shore Mackerel Average market value of Bay Mackerel Average earnings of the operative fishermen per year º Two Hundred & Fifty Dollars Average amount paid in British ports for bait, ice, and various sup- plies. ------------- . . . . . s. 2 º ºs e º ºs & sº tº º is sº as a sº dº º ºs Two Hundred Dollars Amount paid to British fishermen for herring Amount paid to British fishermen as wages Amount paid in British ports for repairs Locations frequented by American vessels for Fish Georges Brown, La Eſave & Western Banks Locations frequented by American vessels for Mackerel Actual value of Fish in the water, before taking. . . . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Actual value of Mackerel in the water, before taken . . . . . . . . . . Nothing Facts as to changes in location and mode of conducting American fish- ©I’16S Our Vessels are engaged mostly in the Halibut & Cod Fisheries We have had our vessels go to the Bay of Fundy in some cases but it has been unprofitable & we have discontinued it & confine our Fishing to the Banks outside of any National Jurisdiction and to our own shores H A BROWN & CO. Sworn and subscribed to before me, this 17th day of May 1877 (Seal.) C. G. SISTATE Notary Public. No. 141. Solemn Declaration of William Harvey concerning the Fisheries in Ameri. can Canadian Waters - I William Harvey reside at Aulds Cove Strait of Canso My name is William Harvey am fifty four years of age have been engaged fishing since I was twelve Years old, have been employed from Eighteen to twenty Seasons in American Vessels fishing for Cod and Mackerel in the Gulf of St Lawrence and on the Atlantic Coast of British America and two Seasons on the United States Coast. I have often fished alongside of an American Mackerel fishing fleet when em- ployed in Provincial fishing Vessels. the Catch of Mackerel by Colo- nial Mackerel fishing vessels is not at all lessened on account of an American fleet being alongside of them the main reason for that is I think is that more bait is thrown Out Fully one half of the Crews of American fishing Schooners visiting the fishing grounds of Dominion of Canada are residents and subjects of the Dominion of Canada. In case they are employed on Shares their Monthly Wages will average from thirty to thirty five Dollars per Month many get for the trip lasting for about three Months from one hundred and twenty to Qne hundred and fifty Dollars. They the American fishermen very seldom make use of our shore for Curing their fish or drying Nets. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3215 The Mackerel fishing during the last four or five Years has very much fallen off, during that time the Average Catch has at most only been about one half of what it was ten or twelve Years ago There is no boat fishing done by the Americans worth mentioning on these Shores I have seen occasionally a few American vessels the beginning of June arrive at the fishing grounds but the great body or heft of them don’t arrive until July - And I William EHarvey aforesaid do solemnly declare that I consci- entiously declare that the Statements made in the foregoing declaration are true and I make this Solemn declaration by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th Year of Her Majesty's Reign entitled an Act for the Suppres- sion of Voluntary and Extra judicial Oaths Aulds Cove, Nova Scotia June 11, 1877 - WILLIAM EIARVEY In presence of JAMES G, MC KEEN Justice of the Peace. No. 142. t Donald McEachren being duly sworn, says. My name is Donald McEachren I am fifty two years old I am a British Subject reside at New Town Strait of Canso. have since Eigh- teen hundred and fifty been employed as a fisherman every Season with the Exception of two on board of American fishing Schooners. about ten or twelve summers I was shipped in the United States. the Vessels or Schooners in which I was employed fished for Mackerel and Cod on the Coast of Prince Edward Island. Cape Breton New Brunswick Prov- Vince of Quebec and the Magdalen Islands We often fished alongside. of Colonial Vessels the American fleet being alongside of them did not interfere with the Catch of Mackerel or Cod by Colonial Vessels, on the Contrary, on account of the great quantity of bait thrown out by the American fishermen the Mackerel stay longer on the surface of the Water and bite better than they do when Colonial Vessels are alone because the latter throw out much smaller quantity of bait, therefore the Colonial Vessels catch more Mackerel when alongside of an Amer- ican fleet, the Colonial Vessels are in the habit of following the Amer- ican Wessels on the fishing grounds for the reasons stated during the last two Seasons the Americans have visited the Colonial Waters in much smaller numbers than formerly because there own fishing grounds have become very productive that is they have always been very good but of late years they Americans have got into the habit of Seine fish- ing which they may use in deep water and is the most profitable way of catching Mackerel. Mackerel is found in great abundance in deep Water on the American Coast. • Independent of the number of American fishing Vessels there will per- haps be a series of year when Mackerel will appear in great quantities On Some Shores, then almost disappear from these Coasts for another Series of Years or Seasons and thereupon reappear in as great quantities as ever, the causes for that may be many but are not known. Mackerel are very uncertain in their movements - During the last three years the average number of Ameriean fishing Vessels in the entire Atlantic Provincial Waters excepting those of New- foundland have been about One hundred and fifty Sails this is, that Num- ber was engaged in Mackerel fishing during the last year there ware only about Seventy five Sail of American Mackerel fishermen in the fishing grounds just mentioned during the five Years previous to the last 3216 AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. three Years the average number of American Mackerel fishing Vessels was within the same Waters that I have just named between four and five hundred. The average tonnage of an American fishing Vessel is about Seventy five Tons - Codfishing is not carried on by the American fishing Vessels within three miles from shore I do not know what the expences are of an averaged sized vessel of Seventy five Tons would be for another outfit received in the Provinces on proceeding again to the fishing grounds after having landed her fare in the Provincial Ports for reshipment but the average amount expended by the American fishing fleet in the Provinces would be about three hundred Dollars for Each Vessel per season independent of that portion of the fleet which land their Cargoes in the Provinces and incur large outlays in refitting for another trip or fare of Mackerel. - For Number one and two Mackerel and Number, one Salmon caught by Colonial fishermen the United States are the only Market, the same may be said of fat Herring during the last few years, formerly a small proportion of them went to Quebec and Montreal The Americans do not use the Coast of the British Provinces except Newfoundland for drying Net, or Curing fish About two thousand Provincial fishermen have been employed pr Season during the last ten Years on board American fishing Vessels Among these are about five hundred from Prince Edwards Island the others to the greater extent from Nova Scotia. The presence of American fishermen on our Coasts has in my Opinion been a great advantage to the people of the Provinces And I Donald McEachren aforesaid do solemnly declare on Oath that I conscientiously believe that the Statements made in the foregoing declaration are true, so help me God IDONALD MC EACHERN - CONSULATE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA At Pictou, Nova Scotia, Port Hastings Agency June 9th. 1877 I hereby certify that the foregoing and above Affidavit was duly made before me on the 9th. day of June 1877 by the above named Donald McEachren and on said day signed and sworn to before me by him the said McEachern. OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul at Pictou. No. 143. Solemn Declaration of Richard J.ackman concerning the Fisheries in Canadian and American Waters. Richard Jackman says that he resides near to Port Mulgrave on the West side of the Strait of Canso I am a fisherman by occupation Am thirty Six Years of age went fishing when I was ten years old have been engaged fishing on board of American fishing Vessels after Cod- fish and Mackerel about twenty one years and five Seasons in Colonial fishing vessels. I was Master of American fishing Vessels four Season and three Seasons Master of Colonial fishing Vessels. I used to go the first part of the Year Codfishing and the latter part Mackereling. I went generally to the Grand Banks Western Banks and Gulf of St Lawrence for Codfish and to the Gulf of St Lawrence and along the American Shore for Mackerel. I went in American fishing Vessels to the Georges Banks for Codfish Seven Winters AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3217 Mackerel first appear in the Spring about the first of April off the American Coast near Cape Henry where they are generally caught or taken in Seines and from there they follow the American Coast East- Wardly to Cape Cod and from there they scatter, part remaining around the American Coast and part going Eastwardly along the Nova Scotia Coast and entering the Gulf of St. Lawrence about the first of June Mackerel are taken with Seines in large quantities on the American Coast the last few Years formerly they were caught with hooks The American fishermen generally commence taking Mackerel in the Gulf of St Lawrence or other parts of the Atlantic Coast of British North America about the tenth of June and continue fishing until about the first of November - - More than half the Mackerel caught along the Coasts of British North America during the last ten Years by both Colonial and American fish- ing Vessels were taken outside of three Miles from the Shore About ten Years ago there were upwards of three hundred American fishing Vessels passed through the Strait of Canso into the Gulf of St. Lawrence every season for the purpose of Catching Mackerel & Cod- fish five years ago there probably two hundred vessels Since that time the number has been decreasing until last year when there only about Seventy Sail of American fishing Vessels in the Gulf of St Law. fellC6, The average size of American fishing Vessels is about Seventy Tons. Such a Wessel when new would cost to build and rig about Six to seven thousand Dollars and a vessel of the same would cost to build and rig in the Provinces about three thousand to four thousand Dollars The only fish the American catch inshore on the Atlantic Colonial Coasts are Mackerel The most of the American Mackerel fishermen now Catch Mackerel on their own coast only I believe that the right to fish on the American Coast would be as val- uable to the people of the British Provinces as the Colonial fisheries to Americans provided our people had as good vessels and fitted them out as Well and had as much enterprise as the Americans The presence of American fishermen in the Provinces is of great pecuniary gain and ad- Vantage to our people in consequence of said fishermen purchasing in Our Ports large supplies of Provisions Bait Salt and fresh Barrels Salt Wood Ice and all kinds of fishermen's supplies and occasionally making repairs to their Vessels requiring Cables Anchors Canvas Cordage Spars &c. &c. From my experience I believe that the average expendi- ture of American fishing Vessels in the British Provinces during the whole Season would be upwards of Seven hundred Dollars The American fishermen make little or no use of the privilege of cur- ing their fish and drying their nets on the Coast of the Province The bait used for Catching Mackerel comes from the United States Consists of Pogies and Clams and is takén almost entirely on the Amer- ican Coast Colonial fishing Vessels use the same kind of bait and ob- tain it from the United States, Pogies are taken nearly altogether in Seines and within three miles of the land I was born in the Strait of Canso and am a British Subject And I Richard Jackman aforesaid do Solemnly declare that I con- Scientiously believe that the Statements made by me in the foregoing declaration are true and I make this Solemn declaration by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th Year of Her Majesty's Reign entitled an Act for the Suppression of Voluntary and Extra judicial Oaths RICHARD JACKMAN 202 F 3.218 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. I the undersigned Notary Public Do hereby Certify that on the 11th day of June 1877 personally appeared before me the above named Rich- ard Jackman and then and there made and subscribed the above and foregoing declaration as Witness my hand and Seal of Office at Port Mulgrave the day and year above mentioned (Seal.) JAMES G M CEQEEN Notary Public No. 144. Statement of Thomas Chas Smith of Port Hood Island concerning fisheries made June 8th. 1877. My name is Thomas Chas Smith, am about 55 years old, have always resided on Port Hood Island, I have been engaged in fishing since I was a boy, have never sailed on American fishing schooners—my fishing has almost exclusively boat fishing between and along the Coasts of Cape Breton & Pr. Edwr Island the American fishermen have come less and less during the last 5 years to these fishing grounds—I am convinced that the presence of Am. fishing Schooners has pecuniarily greatly benefited the people of this Province and that the American fishing fleet has never interfered with, that is, lessened the catch of Colonial fishermen of mackerel or other fish on the contrary I believe that the presence of the American fishing fleet on account of their throwing out such a great quantity of best bait has attracted the mackerel to these parts and that when the Americans were so much interfered with by Dominion Revenue Cutters some years ago and thereby and by other molestations partly driven away from these waters, the mackerel began to leave us to, not be able to obtain as much excellent food as when the Americans threw out so much bait. Where from 8 to 10 years ago and before that time a hundred barrels of mackerel caught there are now & have been during the last 3 years scarcely 10 barrels caught. The Americans do not take to boat fishing, their way of mackerel fishing is by schooners. The American fishermen do not cure their fish our our shores and but exceptionally dry their nets on our grounds. Hundred of cattle and great quantities of all kinds of farm produce were sold during the season to the Americans while they were coming here in great numbers and money circulated freely in consequence but I am not able to make an estimate of how much they spent on an average during the season either per single vessel or in the aggregate. TEIOMAS SMITH Subscribed & Sworn to before me June 8, 1877 sº OSCAR MALMRO U. S. Consul No. 145. Solemn Declaration of Asberry Straham concerning the Fisheries in Cana- dian and American Waters Asberry Strahan says that he resides near Aulds Cove on the West- ern side of the Strait of Canso, am a fisherman by occupation, am now fifty years of Age, am a British Subject, my home has always been in Nova Scotia where I was born, I have been thirty seven Summers fish- ing, thirty two Summers of which, I was fishing in American Vessels and five Summers in Colonial Vessels The first few Years I went fishing in American Vessels, was for Cod- fish, in the Gulf of St Lawrence, always outside of three miles from AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION, 32.19 shore. then I went fishing for Mackerel in American Vessels, into the Gulf of St Lawrence, the last three years I have been engaged Seining Mackerel on the American Coast in United States Vessels, and found Mackerel plentiful, I was fishing on Shares as a hand on board, the general length of the fishing Season is about five months. the first summer I was Seining Mackerel, I cleared two hundred and fifteen Dol- lars, the second season three hundred and Sixty two Dollars, and the last season two hundred and sixty Dollars, averaging Each season two hundred and Seventy nine Dollars or fifty five Dollars prMonth clear of boarding The bait used for catching Mackerel comes from the United States, consists of Pogies or Menhaden and Clams, and is taken almost entirely along the American Coast, Colonial fishing vessels use the same kind of bait as American fishing vessels, and obtain it from the United States, Pogies are taken nearly altogether in Seines and within three Miles of the land, Ten to twelve Years ago about three hundred American fishing ves- sels frequented the Gulf of St Lawrence after Mackerel, and generally obtained good fares, taking from one to three fares each season, and frequently landing their first and second trips or fares in the Strait of Canso, or in Prince Edwards Island for reshipment to the United States, by Steamer or Sailing Vessel, Mackerel have been getting scarcer in the Gulf of St. Lawrence every Year during the last four or five Years, The American Mackerel fishermen purchase large quantities of Supplies in the Provinces, such as Salt, Barrels, Bait, Clothing, provisions, Wood, Small Stores, and all kinds of fishing supplies, and occasionally require large outlays in repairs to their vessels, the average expenditure by the American Mackerel fishermen in the British Provinces during the productive seasons would I have no doubt be upward of Seven hundred Dollars each prSeason which would in the aggregate amount to two hundred and ten thousand Dollars ($210.000) from the Mackerel fleet pr Season - st The Codfishing fleet of American vessels also purchase supplies largely in the Provinces such as Ice, fresh Herring and Mackerel for baiting their vessels, Clothing, Wood, provisions, small Stores &c. with occasional repairs, the average expenditure of the Codfishing fleet would be about three hundred and fifty Dollars to four hundred for each vessel prisea- son, there are about One hundred American Codfishing Vessels calling and obtaining Supplies in the Strait of Canso. I cannot give an opin- ion of the amount of Supplies they purchase in other ports of the British Provinces, The entire fleet of American fishing Vessels give employment on board their vessels to a great many of the people of this Province, I should say that during the last ten Years on an average that six to Seven hundred of our men found employment on board of American fishing Vessels yearly The presence of American fishermen in our Ports is of great pecuniary gain to our people, in consequence of the large Amountts of Supplies they purchase in our Ports, and the great number of Our Men employed in American fishing Wessels The American fishermen make very little use of the privilege of cur- ing fish and drying nets &c on our shores, When Mackerel were plentiful in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, they were taken nearly all over the Gulf, Wherever bait was thrown Mackerel Would generally appear on the surface, and more Mackerel were taken Outside than inside three Miles from the Shore I believe that the right to fish on the American Coast would be as 3220 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. valuable to the Colonial fishermen as the Colonial fisheries to Ameri- cans, provided our people had as good vessels as well fitted and had as much Capital and enterprise as the Americans And I Asberry Strahan aforesaid do solemnly declare that I con- scientiously believe that the Statements made in the foregoing declara- tion are true and I make this declaration by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th. Year of Her Majesty's Reign Entitled an Act for the sup- pression of voluntary and extra judicial oaths ~x. BERRY STRAEIAN I hereby Certify that on the 9th day of June 1877 above named Derry Strahan personally appeared before me and made and subscribed the foregoing Solemn Declaration As witness my hand & seal of Of. fice (Seal.) JAMES G MCPCEEN Notary Public No. 146. Port HooD ISLAND, C. B. June 7th, 1877. Statement of Nathaniel Smith of Port Hood Island. I am 58 years old, have always lived on Port Hood Island following cod and mackerel fishing since I began to grow up—during the last 10 years the mackerels have much less frequented the Gulf of St Lawrence their number has much decreased and during the last 3 years the catch of mackerel has been almost a failure—We hardly ever see the Ameri- cans fish in boats. I don’t think the catch of mackerel in these waters has decreased on account of the fishing of the American fishermen. The Americans as far as I know never land of the adjacent shores to cure fish and but seldom to dry nets—codfishing is not carried on by the Americans within 3 miles from shore or at least extremely seldom ; I have never been employed as a fisherman on American vessels—The Americans while the catches were good put considerable money into circulation in this neighbourhood but I have no idea of the aggregate amount or of the average expenditure of a single vessel. I solemnly declare that the above statement of facts is correct and make this dec- laration conscientiously believing that said facts are true and under the act of 37 Victoria entitled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra judicial oaths. - N SMITH Port Hood Island June 7 1877 Declaration made and subscribed before * OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Oonsul No. 147. Solemn Declaration by Hugh Cameron concerning the Fisheries in Cana- dian dº American Waters made at Port Hastings Strait of Canso N. S. this 5th day of June 1877 Hugh Cameron says that he resides at New Town on the East side of the Strait of Canso, am a British subject fifty two Years old, am ac- quainted with the American and Canadian Atlantic Sea Fisheries. For the last three years there has been more or less of a failure in the Catch of Codfish Mackerel and Berring in the Waters of the Gulf of AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3221 St. Laurence no Codfish are Caught inside the Waters of the Atlantic Sea Coast of the Dominion of Canada except in the Gulf of St. Laurence the falling off in the Catch of Codfish has been about in the following proportion, that while it now takes a Vessel of Sixty Tons to catch a thousand Quintle of Codfish about ten Weeks it would take the same Vessel about Eight Weeks to Obtain the same quantity of fish ten years ago, about twenty Years ago it would take six Weeks, and about thirty years ago about five Weeks to Obtain the same quantity of fish in the Same sized vessel - - The Catch of Mackerel in the Gulf of St Laurence has gone down about two thirds at any rate from what it was before that time four years ago five years ago a vessel during the season would take in a fare and a half or Cargo and half, ten years ago a vessel would take in about two Cargoes or fares about twenty Years ago about three Car- goes or fares I have been employed as a fisherman on board of American fishing Vessels ever since I was Eighteen Years old with the Exception of three Seasons when I did not go fishing. and another Season that I was on board a Colonial fishing Vessel I have never known American fishing Vessels. curing fish or drying their Nets on shore. Except those ves. Sels taking Herrings at the Magdalens Islands where they dry their Seines on Shore The Americans do not use the inshore fisheries at all for the Catching of Codfish There is more mackerel caught outside the three Mile limit than inside, as near as I can judge about two thirds of all Mackerel caught by Americans are caught from three to six Miles from Shore - Mackerel fishing now begins off the Coast of New Jersey. fishing Wessels follow the fish in their run Eastward to the State of Maine. and thence to the Coasts of the British Provinces about from two thirds to three quarters of the mackerel remain during their run North Eastward from New Jersey to the Gulf of St. Lawrence over three Miles from Shore, opposite the Southern Coast of Nova Scotia only a very small portion of the Mackerel during their course Eastward come nearer to the shore than six Miles for the purpose of playing during fine Weather During the Seasons when Mackerel and Codfish were plenty there Were in the Course of the Season in the Gulf of St Lawrence about four hundred American Mackerel fishing Vessels and about two hundred and fifty to three hundred American Codfishing Vessels according to present measurement the tonnage of American fishing Vessels refered to were from thirty to ninety Tons the average would be about fifty five to fifty Eight Tons—for an averaged sized Vessel for Codfishing the number of the Crew would be about ten. and the number of Crew for a Mackerel Catcher would be sixteen and the Crew of a Vessel of average size after Herrings would be about six hands Por about ten Years I shipped on board American fishing Vessels in the United States generally during the month of April and continued in them until the close of the season about the 1st of November and the other Seasons I shipped in the American Vessels at the Strait of Canso. during these Seasons these Vessels were supplied in the Sev- eral Ports of the British Provinces from Yarmouth all the way to Port Daniel in the Bay Cheleur with all kinds of outfits such as Provisions Salt Barrels Bait ice Clothing small Stores and occasionally with Rig- ging Canvas Anchors and repairs to vessels spar booms &c. &c From what I have seen and heard during my Experience I should think that the average expenditure of American fishing vessels in the British Provinces during the whole Season would be upwards of Seven 3222 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. hundred Dollars out of every hundred Vessels frequenting the Gulf of St Laurence fishing about Seven or Eight would require more or less repairs the proper proportion of which is included in my Estimate In my opinion the coming of American fishing Wessels to our shores has no influence whatever in lessening the Catch of Mackerel of the Colonial fishing Wessels - The difference in fitting out and furnishing for a fishing Voyage an American Vessel as compared with a Colonial fishing Vessel would be about twenty five pr0ent. the American Wessel costing that much more than the other ^. I believe that the right to fish on the American Coast would be as Valuable to the people of the British Provinces as the Colonial fisheries are to the Americans provided our people had as good Vessels and fitted them out as well and had as much enterprise as the Americans. And I Hugh Cameron aforesaid do solemnly declare that I conscien- tiously believe that the statements made in the foregoing declaration are true and I make this declaration by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th Year of Her Majesty's Reign entitled an act for the suppression of Voluntary and Extra Judicial Oaths - HUGEI CAMERON OSCAR MALMROS In presence of: U. S. Consul |PORT HASTINGS NOVA SCOTIA June 7th 1877 Personally come and appeared before me the subscribing Justice of the Peace for the County!of Inverness, Hugh Cameron of New Town who did acknowledge before me that he Voluntarily made and subscribed the foregoing solemn Declaration JAMES G, MC KEEN Justice of the Peace No. 148. Memorandum of , emarks made by James Johnson concerning Canadian JFisheries James Johnson says that he resides at Port Hastings Cape Breton, I am a fisherman by occupation from 1853 to 1876 with the exception of One season I have been employed as a fisherman on Board American fishing Schooners on or near the Coast of British North America i e the Atlantic British Coast I went chiefly from Gloucester Massachusetts— Once however from New London I have been mostly engaged in Mack- erel fishing in the Bay of Cheleur, North Cape Prince Edwards Island, between the latter and Cape Breton American fishermen generally commence taking Mackerel in the Gulf of St. Laurence or other parts of the Atlantic Coast of British North America about the 15th of June and continue fishing until about the 1st of November, the average voyage being about six Weeks in length. The Colonial fishermen when fishing inshore, alongside of an Ameri- can fleet of fishing Vessels catch more fish on account of the American Vessels throwing large quantities of Bait Fishing Vessels of the same size in the United States would cost about Sixty per Cent more than Colonial built Vessels and the Outfit about one quarter more than in the Colonies, the only fish, the Americans Catch in shore on the Atlantic Colonial Coasts are Mackerel. The most of the American Mackerel fishermen now Catch Mackerel on their own Coast only, there were AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3223 only about thirty sail of American Mackerel fishermen in the Gulf of St. Laurence last season and the Gulf of St. Laurence comprises about all the Mackerel fishing grounds I believe that the right to fish on the American Coast would be as valuable to the people of the British Provinces as the Colonial fisheries to Americans provided our people had as good Vessels and fitted them . Out as well and had as much enterprise as the Americans The Mackerel fishery in the Gulf of St. Laurence has been much less productive during the last six or Seven Years than formerly, formerly and until about ten years ago from two hundred to two hundred and fifty American Wessels for Mackerel used to frequent the Gulf of St Laurence and obtain fair average Cargoes of Mackerel while in the sea- Son of 1876 only about thirty Mackerel fishing Vessels came into the Gulf and the greater part of these made broken voyages The presence of American fishermen in the Provinces is of great pe- cuniary benefit to our people & For many years past little or no use has been made of the privilege of curing fish and drying Nets on our Shores by the American fisher- Iſle Il - During the seasons when the Mackerel fisheries were productive as they were ten years ago the American fishermen would get full Cargo within about six Weeks they would then deposit or store at this or neighbor- ing points on the Strait of Canso to be reshipped to the United States While they would return once or twice more to the fishing grounds to obtain further Cargo during such a season the average Expenditure of a Midling sized Schooner (say 70 Tons) in the Provinces would be about In consequence of the lesser productiveness of the Mackerel fisheries during the last six or seven Years the American fishing Vessels have Seldom taken over one Cargo of Mackerel in the season and frequently have not been half filled and consequently the Expenditures in the Provinces have been proportionably reduced, very few Mackerel having been landed for reshipment to the United States I am and always have been a British subject residing in the Province of Nova Scotia. : And I James Johnson aforesaid do solemnly declare that I conscien- tiously believe that the facts contained in the foregoing declaration are true and I make this declaration by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th Year of Her Majesty’s Reign Entitled an Act for the suppression of Voluntary and Extra Judicial Oaths. JAMES JOHNSON. Port Hastings Nova Scotia June 5th 1877 | I hereby Certify that on the 5th day of June 1877 the above named James Johnson personally appeared before me and made and Subscribed 8. foregoing Solemn Declaration. As Witness my hand and Seal of 'UIT1C0. (Seal.) JAMES G. MCFOBEN Notary Public No. 149. Solemn Declaration by Edward Foa, concerning the Fisheries in Canadian g dº American Waters Edward Fox says that he resides at Fox Pond on the East side of the Strait of Canso, am a British subject twenty Eight Years old, have fol- 3224. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. lowed the fishing business for twelve Years. always in American fishing vessels with the Exception of one fishing voyage in a Nova Scotia Vessel The Colonial fishermen as a rule catch more Mackerel when alongside a fleet of American fishermen which throw out large quantities of bait, the best and principal bait used for Mackerel is nearly all taken off the American Coast and within three miles of the shore so far as I have ever seen, the bait referred to consists of Pogies and Clams nearly all the bait now used by Colonial fishing Vessels is the bait before men- tioned by me and is taken along the American Coast For Number one and two Mackerel, Number One Salmon and fat Her- rings the United States are the only Market with the Exception of a small quantity that go to Canada, of the fat Herrings however more are sent to Canada than of the Mackerel or Salmon - The average size of American Mackerel and Codfishing Vessels, en- gaged fishing on the Colonial Coasts is from sixty-five to Seventy Tons the Catch of Mackerel in the Gulf of St. Laurence during the last six or seven Years has been gradually decreasing, the Season of 1876 be- ing almost a failure in the Catch of Mackerel in Colonial Waters. Mackerel for some unknown reasons sometimes appear for Series of Years on some Costs in great numbers and then again for a number of years will appear in decreasing numbers and finally altogether disap- pear. Ten Years ago and up to that time there were about two hundred & fifty to three hundred American fishing Vessels passing through the Strait of Canso every season to catch fish in the Chelaur Bay and Coasts of the Gulf of St Laurence Six Years ago there were about two hun- dred vessels, since that time the number has been greatly decreasing until last Year when the entire fleet of Mackerel fishing Vessels in the Gulf of St Laurence was probably not over fifty vessels During the Seasons while the catch of Mackerel was very great about a quarter of the fleet of American Mackerel fishermen would land from one to three Cargoes of Mackerel in the Strait of Canso each season for reshipment to the United States. A vessel of Seventy Tons for exam- ple having landed a trip of Mackerel requires or usually takes the fol- lowing supplies before going again to the fishing grounds for another Cargo viz about three hundred Empty barrels worth about Eighty Cents IEach from Eighty to one hundred barrels of Salt worth about one Dol- lar and a quarter Each, twenty five to thirty barrels of Bait worth about five to six Dollars which with provisions and Small Stores about two hundred and fifty Dollars would make in all for the fit out about seven hundred and fifty Dollars and for a Second trip or fit out about five hun- dred Dollars worth of Supplies would be required, The average expend- iture of those American fishing Schooners which visit our Ports with- out landing Cargoes of fish for reshipment amount to about five hundred Dollars each per season in our Provinces, the average expenditure therefore of the entire Mackerel fleet of American fishing vessels in the British Provinces during the productive Seasons would be about seven hundred Dollars each prSeason In consequence of the decreased Catch of Mackerel during the last six or Seven Year in the Gulf of St Laurence the expenditure of Ameri can fishing Vessels in the British Provinces has been much reduced The number of American Vessels engaged in the Codfisheries around the Colonial Atlantic Coasts has more than doubled within the last six Years about one hundred of these Codfishing vessels call at one point or another in the Strait of Canso twice during the Season for a supply of ice fresh bait provisions &c the average expenditure for that purpose AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3225 being for about ten Tons ice About thirty Dollars and for about a hun- dred barrels of round Herrings or Mackerel about two hundred Dollars which with about one hundred Dollars for Wood Clothing Occasional repairs &c. would make in all about three hundred and thirty Dollars for each Vessel prSeason For many years past little or no use has been made by the American fishermen of the privelege of curing fish and drying Nets on our shores And I Edward Fox aforesaid do solemnly declare that I conscien- tiously believe that the Statements made in the foregoing declaration are true and I make this declaration by virtue of the act passed in the 37th Year of Her Majesty's Reign Entitled an Act for the Suppression of Voluntary and Extra judicial Oaths - TEIOMAS EDWARD FOX Port Hastings Nova Scotia June 6, 1877 In presence of: OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul This is to certify that the above and foregoing Solemn Declaration was duly made before me on the 6th day of June 1877. and subscribed in my presence by the above named Thomas Edward Fox JAMES G. MCFCEEN Justice of the Peace No. 150. I, William H. McAlpine do solemnly declare—that I reside at Louis- burg, Cape Breton, where I am now and since the year 1866 have been engaged in General merchandizing and of supplying American fishing vessels calling at this Port—that during the last six (6) years the num- ber of vessels calling as aforesaid has averaged at least 100 i. e. Ameri- can fishing vessels one half of which number are codfishing and the other half herring fishing vessels—that these vessels are in the habit of calling at different Ports of the Maritime Provinces before they call at this Port and of buying supplies at them or at most of them—that the amount expended at this Port by each of said vessels during said period of six years has averaged at least twenty five dollars per season— that about one half of said vessels have been annually supplied by me and the other half by Mr. Gardener of this Port and that the supplies for which said expenses were incurred consist of ice, bait, small stores, beef, mutton and occasionally other items to a small extent that I am not aware that the presence of American fishermen in the waters of the Dominion of Canada is of any injury to the people thereof, but I think that their presence is of great pecuniary profit to the maritime Provinces and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th year of the reign of Her Majesty entitled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extrajudicial oaths - * } Louisburg C. B. July 17th 1877. t In presence of - W. EI. MCALPINE UNITED STATES CONSULATE AT PICTOU, Now A SCOTIA LOUISBURG C. B. July 17th 1877. I hereby certify that at said Louisburg on said July 17th the above named William H. McAlpine made before me and subscribed in my presence the foregoing “Solemn Declaration.” Attested: OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul 3226 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 151. I, Joseph Townsend do solemnly declare—that I reside at Louisburg, C. B., that since 1863 I have been employed as Clerk and in the absence of the Principal as the manager of the business of first Mr. William E. Gardener of this place and afterwards of the “Louisburg Supply Com- pany ” to which Mr. Gardener transferred or sold his said business—that said business from 1863 up to the present time has been in the habit of Supplying American fishing vessels calling at this Port, one half of them about being supplied by the above business in which I was and am em- ployed and one half by Mr Wm. H. McAlpine of this place—that the number of American fishing vessels calling here has averaged during the last 5 or 6 years at least one hundred, one half of them codfishing the other half herring fishing vessels—that the average expenditure per vessel per season during said period has been about $25, perhaps a little more, at this port—that the American fishing vessels are in the habit of calling at different ports of the Maritime Provinces before they call and after they have called at this port and of buying supplies at all or most of the Ports where they call—that the supplies purchased by them at our Port consistin ice, bait, small stores, beef, mutton and occasionally in other items to a small extent—that I think that the presence of Ameri- can fishermen on our coasts a great pecuniary advantage to the people thereof i. e. of the Provinces while I am not aware that it, that is the presence of American fishermen on our coasts is in any repect injurious to the interests of the Provinces, and I make this solemn declaration Conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign entitled an Act for the Suppression of voluntary and extrajudicial oaths. Louisburg C. B. July 17th 1877. JOSEPEI TOWNSEND UNITED STATES CONSULATE AT PICTOU, Nov A SCOTIA LOUISBURG C. B. July 17th 1877 I hereby certify that at said Louisburg on this 20th day of July 1877 the above named Joseph Townsend made and subscribed before me the foregoing Solemn Declaration Attested : OSCAR MAILMROS U. S. Consul . NO. 152. I, James Peeples of Pirate Cove, Guysboro County do solemnly de- clare: that I have been a fisherman for the last 33 years I have been employed during that time as well on American as on Nova Scotia fish- ing vessels, mostly on American vessels prosecuting the Mackerel, fish- ery in the Gulf of St Lawrence, for the last 5 or 6 years I should have said I have not been employed in fishing—according to my experience American fishing vessels make no use or but very little use of the privi- lege of drying their nets on the Coasts of the Dominion of Canada and do not at all cure their fish on these coasts—I do not think that Provincial fishermen catch less fish on account of having a fleet of American VeSSels fishing along side of them I rather think the Provincial fishermen catch more fish by fishing alongside of an American fleet because the quantity of bait thrown keeps the fish on the surface of the water—I have been in American fishing vessels prosecuting the fishery in the Gulf of St Law- rence that have spent from 1300 to 1500 dollars per season in the Provinces in case they had to refit after landing their first catch for re Shipment AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3227 to the States—I went this spring employed as cooper in an American fishing schooner “Stagawa” from Gloucester catching herring at the Magdalen Islands and I know that her bill of expenses at Pirate Cove amounted to about $600 ºr—during the last 6 or 7 years the mackerel fishery has much fallen off—I think that about one half only of the mackerel that were caught from 10 to 12 years ago have been caught during the last 5 years—the last 2 years the mackerel fishery was a pretty bad failure—I know that very few if any vessel caught enough fish to make more than one trip—I know that the American fishing Vessels call at a great many Ports all along the coasts of the Dominion and expend much money in these Ports, formerly Yankee money was about all the money we saw—the presence of American fishermen on the Coasts of these provinces has been a great help to the people of the Provinces—they were in the habit of buying socks, mittens, all kinds of Vegetables, mutton beef, store goods and supplies of all kind, their pres- ence was certainly no injury to our people in any respect; I do not think that much fishing will diminish the fish that annually visit the fishing grounds—I rather think that feeding them by throwing out much bait attracts them—seine fishing may injure the fisheries, but the real reason Why in Some years mackerel are plentiful and in other years scarce is not known, I think that more than one half of the crew of American fishing vessels are natives and residents of the Canadian Provinces; and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty’s reign entitled “An Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra-judicial oaths. JAMES PEEPLES Dated Pirate Cove July 20th, 1877. UNITED STATES CONSULATE AT PICTOU N. S. PIRATE CoVE July 20th, 1877. I hereby certify that on this 20th day of July 1877 the above named James Peeples before me, at said Pirate Cove voluntarily made and subscribed the foregoing Solemn Declaration. Attested : OSCAR MALMROS, U. S. Consul. No. 153. I, Samuel Peeples of Pirate Cove, Guysboro County do solemnly de- clare : that I have been for over 30 years a fisherman I have been nearly every summer been engaged on American fishing vessels fishing in the Gulf of St Lawrence, during the spring and fall I have been en- gaged in boat fishing on my own account—during the last 8 or 9 years the mackerel fishery has much fallen off—during the last 6 years the catch has not averaged more than 4 of what it was 10 or 15 years ago and during the last two years it has been almost a total failure—I do not think that Provincial fishermen catch any the less fish on account of fishing alongside of an American mackerel fishing fleet on the con- trary I think their catch is then greater; I have often seen Provincial fishermen in their boats come out to fish alongside of the American fleet because they would catch a greater quantity by following the fleet than they would by remaining in-shore—American fishermen make but little use of the coasts of these Provinces for drying nets and none for curing fish—I know that American fishermen call at a great many ports of the Canadian Provinces and that they buy more or less at every port where they call; they buy beef, mutton, all kinds of vegetables, store goods 3228 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. of all descriptions, homespun cloth, mittens & socks &c and I am of the opinion that on account of the money they spend they have very mate- rially benefitted the people of these Provinces while I am not aware that their presence on the coasts of the Dominion has in any respect been injurious to the interests of its inhabitants—I think that about one half of the crew of the American fishing fleet is composed of natives and residents of the Maritime Provinces—All fat mackerel as far as I know goes to the United States and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of Her Majesty’s reign entitled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra-judicial Oaths. Dated Pirate Cove July 20th 1877. * g SAMUEL E PEEPLES UNITED STATES CONSULATE AT PICTOU, Now A SCOTIA TIRATE COWE July 20th 1877. I hereby certify that at Pirate Cove, County of Guysboro’, Nova Sco- tia, the above named Samuel A. L’eeples, on this 20th day of July 1877 voluntarily made before me and subscribed in my presence the forego- ing “Solemn Declaration. Attested : OSCAR MAILMROS - U. S. Consul NO. 154. I, Isaiah Crittenden do solemnly declare that I am a British subject, a native of Nova Scotia and living at Pirate Cove Guysboro’ County Nova Scotia I am 42 years old and have been employed in fishing every summer since I was 13 years old, during the last 27 summers I have always been engaged as one of the crew of American fishing vessels; the American fishing vessels hardly ever dry their nets or cure fish on the Coasts of the Dominion of Canada about 40 to 50 American herring fishing vessels have annually visited the coasts of the Provinces of the Dominion of Canada their crew is about 7 or 8 men each vessel—their catch per vessel has been about 600 barrels during the last 6 years each season—from 8 to 10 years back the American mackerel fishing fleet consisted of from 300 to 500 sails per season in the Gulf of St Lawrence the mackerel fishing vessels average about 12 to 14 men as a crew during the last 6 years and particularly the last 2 the mackerels have been getting very scarce the reason being according to my opinion and that of many old fishermen that the scarcity of bait found by the mack- erel induced them to go to other grounds—the bait was scarce because the American fishing fleet had been driven away by the Dominion Rev- enue Cutters during the fishery troubles of 1870 or I think it was 1871 from that time the mackerel fishery began to fall off—the same falling off took place when the Revenue Vessels of Great Britain interfered with the American fishermen about the years 1853 or 1855 and the Americans in consequence resorted in but small numbers to the Gulf of St Lawrence—during the last 5 years according to the best estimate I can form the American fishing fleet fishing for mackerel in the Gulf of St Lawrence has consisted of about 250 sails during the season that is if I strike an average of their number during that period—the Ameri- can mackerel fishing vessels begin to arrive in the Gulf of St Lawrence about the beginning of June in each year in small numbers, but the greater number arrive only after the first week in July or even as AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMſ SSION. 3229 late as the beginning of August—the herring fishing vessels arrive at the Magdalen Islands about the 1st of May, they remain there as a rule about 2 to 3 weeks unless the fish happen to be scarce there when they often go to the coast of Newfoundland—Generally the herring fleet makes but one trip a season and after their return home fish off the American coast for cod or mackerel or sometimes they go to the Gulf of St. Lawrence—the American herring vessels have considerably benefited the People on this Strait, besides buying supplies of all kinds, they nearly all hire from two to three boats to go with them to the Magdalen Islands paying about 30 dollars a trip for a man and his boat and ten dollars a boat without a man, the average number of the crew of American herring fishing vessels when they arrive at the Strait consists of from 4 to 5 men and the hire the rest here paying about $20 a man for the run to the Magdalen Islands and back—the mackerel fishing vessels expend likewise a great deal of money in the Maritime Provinces as they call at a great many ports and spend money in every port—as long as I can remember has the trade of the merchants on the Strait of Canso principally consisted in selling goods of all kinds to American fishermen and the people of the Strait of Canso would have Seen but very little money if it had not been for the money spent by American fishing vessels—On the whole I don’t think that pro- Vincial fishermen get a smaller catch of fish on account of the presence of American mackerel fishing vessels in the Gulf of St Lawrence—Generally and almost without exception the fishing of American Mackerel fishing vessels up to the middle of August or be- ginning of September is done outside the 3 mile limit from shore and after that until the latter part of October they mostly fish inshore—the Only fishing prosecuted by American fishermen off the Coasts of the Dominion of Canada is the herring, the mackerel and the codfishing, the codfish is all caught outside the limits, off shore. During the times When mackerel fishing was still good the American fishing vessels Would ship from 300 to 350 men each season from the Strait of Canso and Cape Breton I think that the crew of American fishing vessels is Composed of about $ natives of the Maritime Provinces who continue to reside in the Provinces and are British subjects—In my opinion the out- fitting of an American fishing vessel for the Gulf of St Lawrence costs about $300 to $400 more than the outfitting of a fishing vessel of the Same tonnage in the Province of Nova Scotia; And I make this solemn Öeclaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty’s reign entituled An Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra judicial oaths. Dated Pirate Cove July 21st 1877. ISAIAH OBITT ENDEN UNITED STATES CONSULATE AT PICTOU, Now A SCOTIA PIRATE COVE July 21st 1877. I hereby certify that on this 21st day of July 1877 at Pirate Cove, Guysboro’ County, Nova Scotia, the above named Isaiah Crittenden Voluntarily made before me and subscribed in my presence the above and foregoing “Solemn Declaration.” - Attested : OSCAR MALMROS, U. S. Consul 3230 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 155. I, E. Aug. Crittenden at Pirate Cove, Strait of Canso do solemnly declare that : I have followed the business of fishing for 44 seasons, I am a British subject & have always resided in Nova Scotia—that during the whole period of 44 years I have every summer been employed in American fishing vessels that during the last six years the mackerek fisheries in the Gulf of St Lawrence have much fallen off; it has dur- ing those six years certainly been not more than one half (3) of what it was before ; the cause of this falling off is I think entirely unknown— the annual number of American fishing vessels of every description in the Gulf of St Lawrence during the last 5 years has averaged I think 50 sails fifty sails while ten years ago or longer they numbered from 400 to 500 sails—the average tonnage of an American fishing vessel is about sixty (60) tons, a vessel of this size is manned by a crew of 13 to 14 men; fully one half of the crew of the American fishing vessels are subjects of and residents of the Dominion of Canada;-the American make hardly any use of the privilege of drying nets and curing fish on the Coasts of the Dominion—I do not believe from my experience that the catch of Provincial fishermen is smaller when fishing alongside of an American fishing fleet on the contrary I think that more fish are brought to the surface and caught when a number of vessels are fish. ing together—during the last two or three years the American herring fishing fleet in the waters on the coasts of the Dominion have num- bered about 20 to 25 a year, in former years it numbered about 40 or 50 sails—during the last 3 years the herring fishing Am. vessels have averaged per vessel about 400 to 500 barrels per vessel, in former years that is 8 or 10 years ago they averaged about one thousand barrels the Codfish caught by the Americans is all caught outside of a line three (3) miles from shore—the halibut or other fish caught by Americans off the Coasts of the Dominion of Canada is totally insignificant and not Worth mentioning—the American fishermen expend a great deal of money in the Provinces for beef, mutton, potatoes & other vegetables and supplies of every description as they are in the habit of visiting many ports of the Dominion in succession from the time they leave the American coast until they arrive on the fishing grounds and during the whole season while they are in the Gulf of St Lawrence and they are buying more or less at every port they call at—I think the average ex- penditure of a seventy ton American fishing vessel in the several ports of the maritime Province may be safely estimated at $200 per season, unless they land their fare for re-shipment to the States in which case the expenses for a re-outfit would be of course much larger—a fishing Vessel of a size which costs here about $500 would cost about $1500 to $1600 in the States and the outfit in the States is at least higher than the cost of outfitting a fishing vessel of the same tonnage in Nova Scotia—I think that the presence of American fishermen on the coasts of the maritime Provinces is a great pecuniary benefit to them i. e. the Provinces and not in any respect injurious to the interests of the Peo- ple of the Provinces; and I make this solemn declaration conscien- tiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of her Majesty's reign entituled “An Act for the Suppression of Voluntary and extrajudicial oaths. Dated Pirate Cove July 19th 1877. his E. A.U.G. -- CRITTENDEN mark In presence of: OSCAR MALMROS Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3231 UNITED STATES CONSULATE AT PICTOU, NOVA SCOTIA - PIRATE CoVE July 19th 1877 I hereby certify that on this 19th day of July 1877 the above named E. Augustus Crittenden at Pirate Cove before me made and subscribed the foregoing “Solemn Declaration.” Attested : - OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul No. 156. I Ebenezer C Peeples of the County of Guysborough in the Prov- ince of Nova Scotia Do Solemly declare that I am a British subject, that I am by occupation a fisherman. Have been fishing in American fishing vessels for the last thirty six Summers during the Spring and fall I have often been engaged fishing in Boats inshore on my own ac- count the Wessels in which I was employed prosecuted the Mackerel fishery in the Bay of St. Lawrence during the last five or six years Only about one fourth of the Mackerel were caught during the season that were caught in former Years, say fifteen Years ago and prior to that According to my estimate three quarters of the Mackerel caught by American fishing vessels are caught outside of the three Mile limit from Shore, not more than one quarter being caught inshore ~. I do not think that the Catch of Provincial fishermen are any the less because an American fleet are fishing in the same vicinity •. The cause why mackerel are very plentiful in some seasons and very Scarce in other seasons is not known - At least one half of the Crews of American fishing Vessel are com- posed of Natives and residents of the Maritime Provinces of Canada The American fishing fleet derive little or no advantage from the privelege of drying nets and Curing fish on our Coasts as they are not in the habit of making use of the privelege, occasionally the may cure an insignificant quantity of Herrings at the Magdalene Islands During the last five Years the average number of American Mackerel fishing vessel averaged about two hundred sail in the Gulf of St. Law- I'êIlC6 The average tonnage of these Vessels is I think about fifty Tons The presence of American fishing vessels on the Atlantic Coasts of the Dominion has greatly benefited its people owing to the purchase by the American fishermen of supplies of every description and the Employ- ment given on board these vessels to a large number of people belong- ing to the Provinces - The number of the Crew of an averaged sized American fishing Ves- Sels is about fourteen The Codfish caught by American fishing Vessels are taken entirely Outside the three mile limit The average number of Crew on board Herring fishing Vessels are about Eight. the Herring caught by these American Vessels is nearly all caught on the Coast of the Magdalene Islands About fifty vessels from the United States go to the Magdalen Island for Herrings every Spring. Sometimes some of them go the Island of Anticosti and the Newfoundland shore when Herrings are scarce at the Magdalens. The average catch of these vessels have been for the last five Years about Seven hundred barrels Herring each Vessel - Mackerel Herring and Codfish are the only fish that as far as I know the Americans are in the habit of catching in the Gulf of St Laurence. 3232 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th Year of Her Majestys Reign entitled an act for the suppression of voluntary and extrajudicial Oaths - Pirate Cove Strait Canso July 20, 1877 - EBENEZER O PEEPLES UNITED STATES CONSULATE AT PICTOU, Nov A SCOTIA PIRATE Cove, July 20th 1877. I hereby certify that at Pirate Cove on this 20th day of July 1877 before me and in my presence the above named Ebenezer C. Peeples voluntarily made and subscribed the foregoing “Solemn Declaration. Attested: © OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul No. 157. I, Samuel Peeples of Port Mulgrave on the Strait of Canso do sol- emnly declare that I am 34 years old that for 16 years up to within 5 years I have been one of the crew of some American Mackerel or cod- fishing vessel—that I am of the opinion that nearly if not fully two thirds (#) of the crew of American fishing vessels are subjects and in- habitants of the British North American Provinces—that the Provincial fishermen catch quite as many mackerel when fishing alongside of an American Mackerel fishing fleet as they would catch in case there were no American fishing vessels on the Mackerel grounds of the British North American coasts—until within about the last 6 years the Ameri- can Mackerel fishing vessels began to arrive on the fishing grounds of the Gulf of St Lawrence at the beginning of June but during the last 5 or 6 years but very few arrived until after the 4th of July and during the present season they have but just now arrived in any numbers—the reason why they have during the last 6 years arrived so late in the Gulf of St Lawrence is that the Americans have had a very good cátch dur- ing the early part of the summer season off their own coasts—up to about the middle of July the mackerel in the Gulf are rather poor they don’t begin to fatten until about the middle of July—about #d of the entire catch of the American Mackerel catching fleet in the Gulf of St Lawrence is caught off-shore that is out side of the 3 mile line from Shore and only about ; is caught inside that limit—the codfish caught by the American cod fishing vessels is all caught outside the 3 mile limit on the grand banks of Newfoundland and other places on the high seas— the Americans do not dry their nets on the coasts of the British North American Provinces or at least but very rarely and do not at all cure their fish on these coasts—I consider the presence of American fishing vessels on our coasts and in our ports as of the greatest benefit to the inhabitants of the Provinces as they spend much money in all the ports where they call and they are in the habit of calling at a great many Provincial Ports in the course of the season in fact when we have not the custom of the American fishing vessels in the Strait of Canso there is but very little business done of any kind and I make this solemn dec- laration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign entitled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra-judicial Oaths. Dated at Port Mulgrave July 21st 1877. - SAMUEL H PEEPLES AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3233 UNITED STATES CONSULATE AT PICTOU, Nova Scotia, * PORT MULGRAVE July 21. 1877 This is to certify that at said Port Mulgrave on this 21st day of July the above named Samuel H. Peeples voluntarily made before me and personally subscribed the foregoing “Solemn Declaration. Attested : OSCAR MAILMROS r U. S. Consul No. 158. I, James McNair do solemnly declare that I live at Port Mulgrave on the Strait of Canso—that I am 48 years old—that ever since 1849 I have been fishing every season except the two last seasons, mostly on Ameri- can Vessels but sometimes also on vessels belonging to the Strait of Canso—the Americans do not make use of the coasts of the Dominion of Canada to dry nets or cure fish except that the American herring fishers sometimes dry their seines on the Magdalen Islands—the cod- fishing is carried on by Americans altogether off shore—the proportion of mackerel caught inshore by the Americans averages I think about # of their entire catch—I do not think that the Provincial fishermen catch a smaller quantity of mackerel on account of fishing alongside of an American fleet—I think that mackerel fishing by seines ought to be pro- hibited as it breaks up the schools of mackerel and injures the fishing only a few American vessels however fish with seines—indeed I do not think that fishing with Seines is profitable as those at least that the Americans use can not be employed in shore to advantage—the Ameri- cans often land their seines because they find the fishing by hook more profitable—I think that at least one half of the crew of Am. fishing Vessels are natives of and reside in the several Provinces of the Dominion of Canada—the mackerel fishery has very much fallen off during the last 5 years or so—the reason why the mackerel catch has been poor 2 sea- Sons ago is that during that season the mackerel were very much chased by the horse mackerel a fish from 5 to 8 feet long preying upon the mack- erel; the mackerels shift and take new routes during some seasons; they do not regularly return to the breeding grounds like the salmon— they, the mackerel were very plentiful, they say last season on the coasts of Newfoundland while they were scarce in the Gulf of St Lawrence— the Only fish caught by Americans off the Atlantic coasts of the Domin- ion either in-shore or off shore are mackerel, codfish and herring, to a Small extent however the Americans prosecute also the halibut fishing— they do not employ more than from 6 to 8 vessels in halibut fishing and these generally fish off the Coasts of Anticosti And I do make this Solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by Virtue of the Act passed during the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign en- titled “An Act for the suppression of voluntary and extrajudicial oaths. Dated Port Mulgrave July 21.st 1877. - JAMES MCN AIR UNITED STATES Consul.ATE AT ProTou N. S. IPORT MULGRAVE July 21st 1877. I hereby certify that the above named James McNair on this 21st day of July 1877, at Port Mulgrave, personally made before me and sub- Scribed in my presence voluntarily the above “Solemn Declaration. Attested : OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul 203 F. 3234 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 159. I, John Murray, do solemnly declare that I was born and always have been living at Port Mulgrave on the Strait of Canso ; that I am 49 years of age—that since I was 19 years of age I have been engaged in fish- ing during the summer seasons—that with the exception of two seasons I have always shipped in American fishing vessels during those 2 season I was in Provincial vessels—the Americans do not dry their nets on the coasts of the Dominion except occasionally for half a day nor do they cure their fish on these coasts——the crew is about 4 composed of natives of the British North American Provinces who are still residing in the Provinces and are of course british subjects—the Americans catch all their codfish on the banks or off-shore. I do not think that Provin- cial fishermen catch any smaller number of fish on account of fishing alongside of American fleets of mackerel fishers—the mackerel fishery has much fallen off during the last 5 years and especially during the last 2 years it has almost been an entire failure—the cause of the falling off of the mackerel fishery is not known—during the present season mackerel promise to be in fair quantities in the Gulf of St Lawrence from all I have lately heard—the American fishermen i. e. mackerel fishers begin to come in June but of late years they don’t arrive on the fishing grounds in any number until after the 4th of July—the mack- erel are poor until after they have spawned that is about the middle of July—they are just getting fat now—the Americans catch by far the larger quantity of mackerel outside of the three mile line from shore, I should not think that the Americans catch more than one fourth of their entire catch of mackerel in-shore that is inside the 3 mile limit—the cost of outfit of American vessels engaged in the fisheries is considera- bly higher that that of Provincial fishing vessels, their outfit is much better too than that of the Provincials—fat mackerel and fat herring caught by Provincial fishing vessels are nearly all sold in the United States, and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of Her Majesty’s reign entituled an Act for the suppression.of voluntary and extra-judicial oaths. - Dated Port Mulgrave July 21st. 1877. - * JOHN MURRAY UNITED STATES CONSULATE AT PICTOU, N. S. PoRT MULGRAVE July 21st 1877. I hereby certify that at Port Mulgrave on this 21st day of July the above named John Murray voluntarily made before me and subscribed in my presence the foregoing “Solemn Declaration.” Attested : * - . . OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Oonsul. No. 160. I, John H. Ingraham, of North Sydney, Cape Breton, Merchant and Trader, do solemnly depose and say: That I have been doing business as a trader and general merchant at North Sydney, Cape Breton, for the last twenty years. During that period the port of Sydney has been visited annually by a number of Vessels engaged in prosecuting the cod and mackerel fish- ery, belonging to the United States of America. Within the last five AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3285 years the average number of American fishing vessels frequenting this port has been not less than fifty annually. The expenditure of the said American fishing fleet with me as a mer- chant during the last five years has been as follows: In 1872, for Salt..... ... a sº dº tº gº º º ſº w tº gº ºn tº e º 'º we s ºn tº e s sº es e º is tº e- - - - - - - - - - - 121. “ Supplies - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 511. r - $632 In 1873 for Bait----------------. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 15 “ Salt . . . . . . . . . . as ºs º is gº º us e º ºs e º e º we dº e º e * * * * * * * o e º e º e º e. e. 110. “ Supplies . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - e s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 24.75 $2600 In 1874, for Salt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83. “ Bait. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------- 12 “ Sundries. . . . . . , - * ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * ~ * * * * 2590 $2685 In 1875 for salt. - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - 17. “ Sundries. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Tº e s = • * * ~ * 1980 $1997. In 1876 for salt. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 44 “ bait. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ea. ºº e º º dº tº * * * * * * * 27. “ sundries. -------------. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .--------...--- 2100 $2171 There are no fishing vessels employed at present out of this port, the fishery being entirely conducted by shore boats, and fishermen earn only a precarious living ~ t? According to my Experience nearly one half of the crews of Ameri- can fishing vessels frequenting this port are natives of Nova Scotia and Cape Breton. I consider that the presence of American fishing vessels on our grounds, is of great pecuniary benefit to this country. - Dated at North Sydney C. B. this 18th day of July 1877 - JOHN L INGRAHAM E. ARCEIIBAL.D. J. P Sworn to before me No. 161. I. William H. Moore, of North Sydney Cape Breton, Merchant and Trader, do solemnly depose and say: That I have been doing business as a trader and General Merchant at North Sydney Cape Breton for the last twenty years. During that period the port of Sidney has been visited annually by a number of vessels engaged in prosecuting the Cod and Mackerel fishery, belonging to the United States of America. Within the last five years the average number of American fishing vessels frequenting this port has not been less than fifty annually. 3236. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. . The expenditure of the said American fishing fleet with me as a Mer- chant during the last five years has been as follows: In 1872, for Supplies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * ºn e s e s a us as sº e º is º. º. º. º ºr * * * * * * - 100. “ 1873 for Supplies. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3314. “ Bait & Salt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 3494. “1874 “ Supplies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ----- 80. “1875 “ Supplies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862. “ 1876 “ Supplies. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 81. There are no fishing vessels employed out of this port. The fishery is prosecuted to some extent at this port, but altogether by Shore boats, and fishermen make only a precarious living. . . According to my experience nearly one half of the crews of American fishing Vessels frequenting this port are natives of Nova Scotia and Cape Breton. - -- • * I consider that the presence of American fishing vessels on our grounds is of great pecuniary benefit to this country. Dated at North Sydney C. B. this 18th day of July 1877. - * W. H. MOORE Sworn to before me. B. AIROHIBAL.D. J. P. No. 162. I Allan McDonald do solemnly declare that I was born and am living about 1 mile from Cape Jack Antigonish County, Nova Scotia—I am 41 years of age—I have been mackerel fishing for about the last 25 years partly in American and partly in Provincial vessels—I do not think that Americans dry their nets or cure their fish or but seldom on the coasts of the British Provinces—the codfish caught by American vessels is caught on the banks or other places on the high seas, at any rate they catch them but seldom in-shore—the only fish caught by Americans off the Coasts of British America are codfish, mackerel hali- but and herring—during good seasons the American mackerel fleet in the Gulf of St Lawrence consists of about (500) five hundred sails but during the last few years there were but few, the catch of mackerel hav- ing much fallen off—last year I don’t think there were more than sixty . American Mackerel fishing vessels in the Gulf and I don’t think that they have averaged more during the last three years—the American herring fleet on the Atlantic coasts of the British Provinces has aver- aged during the last 5 years from 30 to 40 sails a season—I have never seen more than 10 to 12 sails of American halibut fishing vessel off the Coasts of the British Provinces the American codfishing fleet on the grand banks of Newfoundland is large, I have seen there as many as four hundred vessels at a time—I have been codfishing, herring fishing and mackerel fishing, we often go out early in spring codfishing or her- ring fishing and afterwards mackerel fishing in the Gulf—I know from my own experience that all these American fishing vessels that I have mentioned are in the habit of calling each at different ports in the Prov- inces during each season and of leaving very considerable money in each port they call at—I think I have a pretty correct idea of what their expenses amount to and according to my estimate the average ex- penses of an American fishing vessel in the several ports of the British Provinces amount during the season to about three hundred or four hundred dollars—I should judge that about one half of the crew of the } Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3237 American fishing fleet fishing off the Coasts of the British Provinces consist of natives who are at the same time residents of the Provinces and I do not refer to those who have removed their residence to Glou- cester and other places in the United States—I do not think that the presence of the American fishing vessels in the Gulf of St Lawrence lessens the chances of Colonial fishermen to catch fish on the contrary umy experience has taught me that mackerel are more easily perceived when there are fishing vessels distributed all over the Gulf, then when they rise at one place the others see it by their spy-glasses and join the vessels where the fish rise and all get their share of fish, when there are but few vessels on the fishing grounds they may not at all get to know at what spots to find the mackerel—the latter also rise better when more bait is thrown out than can be done by a few vessels—I have no doubt that the presence of the American fishermen on the coasts of these Provinces has, been of great benefit to them, nearly half our fishermen might almost starve if it was not for the employment given them by the American vessels, And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during time 37th year of Her Majesty’s reign entituled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extrajudicial oaths. * Dated Cape Jack July 24, 1877. his ALLAN + MCDONALD mark. t In presence of t JAMES G. MCFQEEN OSCAR MAILMROS |PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA. COUNTY OF ANTIGONISH I hereby Certify that the above named Allan McDonald voluntarily made and affixed his mark of hand before me at Cape Jack Settlement in Said County of Antigonish the foregoing solemn declaration Given under my hand and Notarial Seal this 24th day of July 1877 (Seal.) JAMES G. MCFQEEN Notary Public No. 163. I, Donald McDonald (Duncan's son) do solemnly declare: that I am living about of a mile south of Cape Jack Light House in Antigonish County, Nova Scotia—that I am 69 years old and have been fishing for the last 50 years with the exception of one summer and during that year I went out in the fall mackerel fishing—I have been on American and Nova Scotian fishing vessels mackerel and codfishing mostly how- ever mackerel fishing—the American fishermen do not dry their nets or cure their fish on the coasts of the British Provinces—I think that about one half of the crew of the American fishing vessels fishing off the Coasts of the British Provinces are british subjects and residing in these Provinces—I think that Colonial fishing vessels catch pretty nearly as many mackerel when fishing alongside of an American mackerel fleet as when fishing alone or as they would do if there were no American fishing vessels in the Gulf—codfish is all caught by Americans off-shore on the banks of Newfoundland the in-shore fishing by American fish- ermen on the Coasts of these provinces has not been of any appreciable injury to Colonial fishermen—while the money expended by them on our coasts for beef, mutton, potatoes and other vegetables mittens, socks, homespun cloths and supplies furnished by our merchants has been of 3238 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. great advantage to our people—that all the fat mackerel and the greater quantity of the fat herring finds its only market in the United States, Some of the fat herring goes to Canada—And I make this solemn declar- ation conscientiously believing the same to true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of her Majesty's reign entitled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra-judicial oaths. Dated Cape Jack July 24, 1877. - his - DONALD + MoDONALD (Duncan's son) mark - In presence of OSCAR MAILMROS IPROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA COUNTY OF ANTIGONISH. I hereby Certify that the above named Donald McDonald (Duncan's Son) voluntarily made and subscribed by affixing his mark before me at Cape Jack Settlement in said County of Antigonish the foregoing Solemn declaration. - Given under my hand and Notarial Seal this 24th day of July 1877 (Seal.) * JAMES G M CEQEEN - Wotary Public No. 164. I Michael Crispo do solemnly declare that I reside at Harbor Bouché Antigonish County, Nova Scotia, that during about 20 years I have been engaged in the fishing business during that period I have owned several fishing vessels during One time I owned 4 fishing vessels—my principal business has been in mackerel but also to some extent in the codfishing business I have exported my fish to Boston New York, Philadelphia, Halifax and Montreal—the United States are the only market for No 1 and No two mackerel and most of the fat herring is sent to the States—since the duty was taken off fish in the States the average profit in the fish business is from 5 to 8 per cent on the capi- tal and labor invested in the business—during the period of say 3 or 5 years preceeding the taking off of the duty on fish in the States my experience has been that money and capital invested in the fishing busi- ness has returned hardly any profit at the least the profit has been a very insignificant one and I make this statement conscientiously be- lieving the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of her Majesty's reign entitled “An Act for the suppression of Voluntary and extra-judicial Oaths - Dated July 25th 1877. MICHAEL CRISPO In prsence of: OSCAR MAILMROS U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF NOVASCOTIA COUNTY OF ANTIGONISH I hereby Certify that the foregoing named Michael Crispo voluntarily made and Subscribed before me at Harbour Bouché in said County of Antigonish the foregoing Solemn declaration Given under my hand and Notarial Seal this 25th day of July 1877 JAMES G. MGKEEN (Seal.) Notary Public AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3239 No. 165. I Patrick Webb of Harbor Bouché do solemnly declare that I live at said Harbor Bouché, Antigonish County, Nova Scotia, that I have been fishing for Mackerel for some years—I am now engaged in the fish business, I own one fishing vessel myself exclusively and own an inter- est in three other fishing vessels, I also supply a number of fishermen and they pay me after their trips by giving me their catch of fish at cur- rent prices—The best estimate I am able to make at a rough calculation is that the profits of the fish business during the last 5 years have aver- aged about five per cent per annum on the capital and labor invested in the fisheries I do think that Colonial fishermen catch about as many fish when fishing together with american vessels in the Gulf as when fishing alone I know that the American fishermen in the course of the season call at many of the Colonial harbours and spend much money and I think that on the whole the presence of the American fisher- men on our Coasts has been a great pecuniary benefit to the People of the Provinces And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign entituled An Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra judicial oaths - Dated at Harbor Bouché July 25th 1877. PATRICK WEBB In presence of OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA. COUNTY OF ANTIGONISH I hereby Certify that the above named Patrick Webb voluntarily made and subscribed before me at Habour Bouché in said County of Antigonish the foregoing solemn declaration Given under my hand and Notarial Seal this 25th day July 1877 - JAMES G. MCFQEEN (Seal.) Notary Public No. 166. I James Gillis do solemnly declare: that I am 67 years of age that I am living about # of a mile from Cape Jack Light House, that for 37 years I have been mackerel fishing, two seasons I have been codfishing— I don’t think that that Provincial fishing vessels catch a smaller quantity of mackerel on account of fishing alongside of an American Mackerel fishing fleet—during some seasons the American fishing vessels can do better in-shore at other seasons they can do better off shore that outside the three mile limit from shore—taken one Season with another I think the Americans catch the greater portion of their mackerel outside of the 3 mile limit from shore—I know that during the last 5 or 6 years the mackerel fishery in the Gulf of St. Lawrence has very much fallen off but can not give an estimate of how much that is in what proportion compared with former years it has fallen off—According to my opinion and experience I think that about 3 of the crew of the American fishing fleet that comes to the Gulf of St Lawrence is composed of natives of the British Provinces who are also living in these Provinces—some but a few only of the American fishermen occasionally dry their nets and cure fish on the coasts of these Provinces—I have no doubt that the presence of American fishermen on these coasts and in our harbors is of very great pecuniary profit to the Peoples of the Provinces on account 3240 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. of the purchase by them of all kinds of supplies and country produce and because they give employment to great many of our fishermen and other people—that No. 1 and No. 2 mackerel and most of the fat herring caught by Colonial fishermen finds its only market in the United States a part of the fat herring lowever is sent to Canada, and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign en- tituled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extrajudicial Oaths. Dated Cape Jack July 24th 1877. his JAMES –– GILLIES - - mark * In presence of - JAMES G. MCEQEEN PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA County OF ANTIGONISH I hereby Certify that the above named James Gillies voluntarily made and Subscribed by affixing his mark before me at Cape Jack settlement in Said County of Antigonish the foregoing Solemn declaration Given under my hand and Notarial Seal this 24th day of July 1877 (Seal.) JAMES G. MGREEN Notary Public NO. 167, I, William Embree do solemnly declare: that I live at a place called Bear Island, on the Strait of Canso about 2 miles below Port Hawkes- bury in the County of Richmond, Nova Scotia—that I am by occupation a fisherman—that I am 55 years old and have been out fishing evy Sea- son since I was 18 years old—that I have never been employed in an American fishing vessel—that I have been fishing in the Gulf of St Law- rence around Sydney the Magdalen Islands and other places in the Gulf—that I have fished alongside of American vessels many a time A never thought that I caught a smaller number of fish on account of fishing alongside of the American fleet—American Mackerel fishing vessels begin to arrive in the month of June in each year but in Small numbers only—they do not come as a rule before the first week in July— this year they are but just now beginning to arrive and I don’t think that the bulk will arrive before August—the mackerel begin to fatten up from about the middle of July—as far as I know the Americans do not dry their nets or but very rarely and do not cure their fish on the coasts of the British North American Provinces—the Americans catch their codfish all on the banks & other places on the high Seas—as near as I can come to it. I think that about two thirds (3) of the entire catch of mackerels by the American fleet in the Gulf of St Lawrence is caught outside of the 3 mile line from shore and about $ in-shore—I think that between and 3 of the crew of the American fishing fleet is composed of natives and residents of the British American Provinces—the aver- age number of the crew of an American Mackerel fishing vessel is about 13 to 14 the crew of an American herring fishing vessel averages about 8 men—the mackerel fishing in the Gulf of St Lawrence has much fallen off—formerly that is ten or fifteen years ago there were as many as 700 to 800 Am. vessels counting each return of the vessels to the Bay as a new vessel—fishing for mackerel in the Gulf of St Lawrence while dur- ing the last 6 years taking an average their number during the Season has not I think been more than 200—I am convinced that the presence of American fishermen in the ports and on the coasts of the Dominion AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3241 is of great pecuniary advantage to the people thereof and in no respect an injury to the interests of the people of the Provinces—I do not think that the American fishing vessels have driven away the mackerel from our fishing grounds, because not only mackerel but herring have got to be very scarce in the Strait of Canso and all around the coasts of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island and yet the Americans have never fished here for herring; and I do solemnly declare that I believe con- scientiously that the foregoing statement or declaration is true and that I make this declaration by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign entituled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra-judicial oaths. Dated July 23d 1877 Bear Island, N. S. A. WILLIAM EMBREE In presence of OSCAR MALMROS - U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF Now A SCOTIA COUNTY OF RICHMOND I hereby Certify that the above named William Embree voluntarily made and subscribed before me at Bear Island settlement in said County of Richmond the foregoing Solemn declaration - Given under my hand and Notarial Seal this 23rd day of July 1877 (Seal.) JAMES G, MCPOEEN Notary Public No. 168. I Charles Steward do solemnly declare—that I live at Bear Island Settlement about 5 miles below Hawkesbury on the Strait of Canso— that I am 46 years old—that I have been fishing ever since I was 12 years old and have followed nothing but that—about 7 or 8 years I have been mackerel fishing during the summer—in the spring I have always been net-fishing in boats—I was 3 seasons in American Mackerel fishing ves- Sels—they generally come from home after the 4th of July and stay up to about the middle or last of September—the mackerel fishing has not been very productive during the last 5 or 6 years, the last 2 or 3 years the catch of mackerel in the Gulf of St. Lawrence has been very poor —while I was in the American fishing vessels they caught at least # of their entire catch outside a line 3 miles from shore in fact most mackerel Were caught by them from 6 to 7 miles from shore—the greater the fish- ing fleet is the more the mackerel are stirred up and brought to the surface of the water and I don’t think that Colonial vessel catch any the less mackerel on account of fishing alongside of an American fleet—I think the Seine fishing is injurious to fishing as it breaks up the schools of mackerel—there have been but few American seine fishers in the Gulf and they never succeeded very well in the Gulf—seine fishing Ought to be prohibited—ſ think about $ of the crew of American fishing vessels is composed of natives of the British Provinces who continue to reside in the Provinces—The American fishermen do not, as far as I know dry their nets or cure fish on the Coasts of the British North American Provinces—during the last 6 years I should think the Ameri- Can mackerel fleet in the Gulf has not averaged over fifty sails a season —during the period of from 10 to 15 years ago the American mackerel fleet in the Gulf averaged I should think about 300 sails—the codfishing. is prosecuted by the Americans exclusively outside the 3 mile limit from Shore, mostly on the banks of Newfoundland—the American herring fleet during the last 10 years has averaged about 20 sails off the Coasts 3242 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. of the British Provinces, they prosecute the fishery at the Magdalen Islands from about the first of May and stay from two to three weeks when they return home—they make but one trip during the year—their average catch per vessel is about 1000 barrels I think—herring, cod and mackerel are as far as I know the only fish caught by American vessels off the Coasts of the British North American Colonies—and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign entitled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra judicial oaths. Dated Bear Island Settlement July 23, 1877. - CHARLES STUART In presence of: OSCAR MAILMFOS U. S. Consul - PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA COUNTY OF RICHMOND I hereby Certify that the above named Charles Stuart voluntarily made and subscribed before me at Bear Island Settlementin said County of IRichmond the foregoing Solemn declaration Given under my hand and Notarial Seal this 23rd day of July 1877 (Seal.) JAMES G. MCFQEEN - Notary Public NO. 169. IEdward Levanger do solemnly declare that I am living at Harbor Bouché that I am 31 years old—that for about eleven years I have been a fisherman by occupation I have been Captain of a fishing vessel of my own the “Winfield Scott’” but I sold her this year—during good fishing times I remember to have counted as many as 500 American fish- ing vessels between East Point on Prince Edward Island & the Magda- len Islands; the mackerel fishing has much fallen off during the last 6 years I don’t think that during that time half as many mackerel have been caught that during 6 years preceding the period dating back from 8 years ago—I think that Provincial fishing vessels catch quite as many fish When fishing alongside of American vessels as they would if the Provincial vessel were by themselves provided they have as good bait as the Americans have which they sometimes however have not— during Some years the Americans catch more fish inside a line 3 miles from shore at other years they catch by far the greater part outside that line, striking an average I think that taken one year with another the Americans have caught an equal portion of their entire catch of mack- erel inside a line 3 miles from shore and outside of that line—I think that about one half of the crew of the American fishing fleet fishing in the waters off the coasts of the Atlantic British Provinces are natives of the British Colonies who still are residents of the Provinces—the Americans dry their nets or seines but very seldom on the coasts of the British Provinces and they don’t cure their fish on the shores of the Colonies— the American herring fleet that comes to the shores of the British Prov- inces averages about 60 to 70 sails the season during the spring they fish at the Magdalen Islands for about two to three weeks & then go home—in the fall they go about the last of September to the coasts of Labrador and Newfoundland—the average size of an American herring fishing vessel is about eighty tons and during the spring trip Such a ves- Sel would on an average catch a thousand barrels of herring—such a vessel going in the fall to the coasts of Labrador and Newfoundland AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3243 would average during the winter trip a catch of about eight hundred barrels—all the codfish Caught by the Americans is caught outside the 3 mile limits—the Americans to a small extent catch halibut off the coasts of the Colonies—about 3 to 5 American halibut fishing vessels fish on the coasts of Anticosti they make generally two trips during the Season and each vessel averages per trip about fifty thousand pounds— besides going to Anticosti the Americans don’t fish for mackerel on any other places off the coasts the British Provinces except about 15 American vessels who go halibut fishing on the grand banks of New- foundland—the Americans don’t fish for any other class of fish off the coasts of the British Colonies except those I have mentioned and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of the reign of her Majesty entituled an act for the suppression of voluntary and extraju- dicial Oaths. s Dated Harbor Bouche July 25th 1877. - - . . EDWARD LEVANGER In presence of OSCAR MALMROS - U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA County of ANTIGONISH July 25, 1877 I hereby Certify that the above named Edward Levanger this 25th day of July 1877 duly made and Subscribed before me the foregoing solemn declaration freely and voluntarily at Harbour Bouché in said county of Antigonish .* Given under my hand and Notarial Seal the day and year above mentioned JAMES G. MCKEEN (Seal.) Notary Public - NO. 170. I George Langley do solemnly declare that I am fifty four (54) years old—that I live at Bear' Island Strait of Canso and am a british sub- ject—that I went first fishing when I was between 12 and 13 years old and have been at it ever since, during the summer season I go in fish- ing vessels but during the spring season and late in the fall I go boat. fishing in-shore—during three seasons I have been employed on Ameri- can Mackerel fishing vessels during the other seasons I have been em- ployed in Provincial Mackerel fishing vessels in the Gulf of St Law- rence—during the last 6 or 7 years the mackerel fishing has been getting poorer every year and has been nothing like what it was say 10 to 15 years ago—I don’t believe that the average annual catch during the last 6 years has been over # part of the entire annual catch of the pe. riod of from 10 to 15 years ago—my own experience in the American vessels on which I have been engaged is that we caught during every one of the three seasons all our mackerel many more than 3 miles from any shore—during clear days the North Cape of Prince Edward Island could just be seen—I can form no estimate of the proportion of mack- erel caught by the entire American fleet inshore—from my experience I don’t think that Provincial fishermen ever catch a smaller number of mackerel on account of having an American fleet fishing alongside of them—I have never seen an American fishing vessel fish for bait in- shore on the Coasts of the Dominion of Canada—the earliest I have been in the Gulf of St Lawrence on an American fishing Schooner was 3244 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION the 20th of June—the big fleet of the American fishing fleet don’t come until after the fourth of July—during the period of from 10 to 15 years ago there were probably from 400 to 500 American sails in the Gulf fishing for mackerel—during the last 5 years they did not average more than 70 or 80 sails annually—I think that fully of the crew of the American fishing fleet in the Gulf of St Lawrence is composed of sub- jects of the North American British Provinces who continue be resi- dents of the Provinces. I think that the presence of American fish- ermen on these coasts and in our harbours is of great pecuniary ad- vantage to the people of the Provinces while I am not aware that it injuriously affects any of their interests and I make this solemn decla- ration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign entituled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra-judicial oaths. Dated Bear Island July 23d 1877. --- GEORGE LANGLEY In presence of: OSCAR MAILMROS U. S. Consul & PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA County of RICHMOND Thereby Certify that the above named George Langley voluntarily made and subscribed before me at Bear Island Settlement in said County of Richmond the foregoing Solemn declaration Given under my hand and Notarial, Seal this 23rd day of July 1877. JAMES G. MCEQEEN (Seal.) Notary Public. - No. 171. - I Hugh McPherson of Bear Island, Strait of Canso, Richmond County, Nova Scotia do solemnly declare that I am a native of and residing in the Province of Nova–that by occupation I am a fisherman—that I have been a fisherman during the last nine (9) years having before that time been a seaman—during two seasons I have been employed as one of the crews of American fishing vessels fishing for mackerel—I think that Colonial fishing vessels catch quite as many mackerel when fishing alongside of an American mackerel fishing fleet as they would catch in case there were no American fishing vessels in the Gulf of St Lawrence —the Americans catch their codfish outside the three mile limit from shore—I don’t think that on an average the Americans catch more than #th of their entire catch of mackerel within the 3 miles line from shore, #th is caught outside that line—the catch of mackerel has much fallen off during the last.5 or 6 years, during the 2 last seasons there were but very few mackerel caught in the Gulf—last season there were probably not over thirty American mackerel fishing vessels in the Gulf of St Lawrence and the year before probably not over fifty or sixty vessels— last year & the year before there were not over #d of the number of Colonial fishing vessels in the Gulf of St Lawrence that visited the Gulf 6 or 7 years ago—eight years ago according to a rough calculation I should say there were about 300 to 400 American mackerel fishing ves- sels in the Gulf—I don’t think that the Americans anywhere cure fish on the Colonial coasts and I have not seen them dry their nets on our Shores—a small number of American mackerel fishing vessels arrive at the Gulf of St Lawrence in June but the bulk of them don’t come until July and August the presence of American fishermen is a great pecu- niary advantage to the People of the Provinces especially when the Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3245. catch of fish is good—they are in the habit of buying at a great num- ber of Ports supplies of every description of the merchant and the farmer and I don’t know in what respect their presence would be dis- advantageous to the people of the Provinces and I make this solemn. declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign entituled “An Act for the suppression of voluntary and extrajudicial oaths. Dated at Bear Island July 23d 1877. -- EHUGEI MCPHERSON In presence of - OSCAR MAILMROS U. S. Consul - PRoyINCE OF Now A Scot[A COUNTY OF RICHMOND I hereby certify that the above named Hugh McPherson voluntarily made and subscribed before me at Bear Island settlement in said County. f Richmond the foregoing Solemn declaration w Given under my hand and Notarial Seal this 23rd day of July 1877 g JAMES G. MCREEN (Seal.) Notary Public. No. 172. I Chandler Embree do solemnly declare that I have been born and always living at Bear Island Settlement about 2 miles below EHawkes- bury on the Strait of Canso—that I am 30 years of age—that ever since. I was 14 years old I have been employed in fishing in boats and vessels qhat during 4 summers I was employed on American fishing vessels in the Gulf of St Lawrence—the mass of American Mackerel fishers ar- rive in the Gulf about the 4th of July—a few American vessels may be there before that time—I do not believe that the catch of Colonial fish- ermen is lessened on account of an American mackerel fleet fishing along- side of them—the average crew of an American fishing vessel consists of about 13 to 14 men—I think that fully one half of the crew of the Amer- ican fishing fleet is composed of natives of the several British North. American Provinces who continue to reside in these Provinces—I think that about #th of the entire catch of mackerel by the American fleet is usually caught outside a line 3 miles from shore and about 4th in-shore. —the Americans do not one in a hundred make use of the privilege to dry nets and none to cure fish on the Colonial coasts as far as I know —the outfitting of an American fishing vessel is much more expensive than that of Colonial vessels of the same tonnage but I cannot say how much higher it comes—The Americans do not fish for Codfish inside the 3 mile limit from shore—I know although I have not seen them that a few American vessels are engaged in halibut fishing of the coast of Anticosti but I can not say how many—codfish, mackerel, herring and halibut are all the fish that Americans catch off the coasts of British North America—the average of herring caught annually by an averaged sized American herring fishing vessel is about I should think 1200 bar- —(1200 barrels)--I don’t think that there have been over 7 seine fishing mackerel vessels on an average during the last 5 years in the Gulf of St Lawrence—they have to go into deep water to get their Seines to Work—seine fishing is injurious to fishing as it breaks up the Schools of mackerel—the American Seiners do not seem to have been successful in the Gulf of St Lawrence the presence of American fishermen on the coasts and in the ports of the several Atlantic British Provinces. has pecuniarily greatly benefited the people of the Coloniés and as far: 3246 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. as I know not been an injury to them in any respect, and I do solemnly declare that I have made the foregoing declaration conscientiously be- lieving the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of Her Majesty’s reign entituled an Act for the suppression of Voluntary and extra judicial oaths. Bear Island Settlement July 23d 1877. - - e CHANDLER EMBREE In presence of: OSCAR MAILMROS U. S. Consul FROVINCE OF Nov A SCOTIA COUNTY OF RICHMOND I hereby Certify that the above named Chandler Embree voluntarily made and subscribed before me at Bear Island Settlement in said County of Richmond the foregoing solemn declaration Given under my hand & Notarial Seal this 23rd day of July 1877 (Seal.) JAMES G. MCKEEN Notary Public N O. l73. I, Solomon Cahoon do solemnly declare that I have been engaged as a merchant at Cape Canso C. B. for over 10 years—that I have been in the habit of trading with American codfishing vessels—that last year, which in that respect was an average year, I traded with about 80 American fishing vessels to the aggregate amount of, as near as I can come to it, about $10,000—this amount represents the sum expended by them at this port and neighboring ports within about 3 hours sail for supplies of all kinds including about $5000.00 advanced to them for purchasing bait at said ports—the Am. vessels, as a rule, buy all the bait they obtain at these ports and adjacent waters, exceptionally how- ever they themselves catch some squid for bait, this however is insignifi- cant and hardly worth being taken into account—the vessels i. e. American vessels, who call at this port for supplies, are in the habit of calling also at other ports in the Dominion to receive supplies of different descrip- tions during the same fishing cruise I can not estimate the sums ex- pended by them in such other ports—the Americans do not carry on boatfishing in these waters and make no use of curing fish and but very little, if any, of drying nets or seines on the coasts of these Provinces— for No 1 Salmon and No 1 and No 2 Mackerel, caught by Colonial ves. sels, the United States are the only market and most of the fat herring, although I do not know the exact proportion, goes to the United States, a portion of the fat herring, I know, finds a market in the Provinces of Quebec and Ontario—codfishing is carried on by the Am... vessels on the high Seas, they do not catch cod within 3 miles from shore—the presence of American fishermen in the waters of these Provinces is as far as I know in no respect injurious to the interests of the Provinces but of great pecuniary advantage to them, and I make this solemn dec- laration conscientiously believing it to be true and by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign entitled an Act for the suppression of Voluntary and extra-judicial oaths Cape Canso June 16th 1877. - SOLOMON. COHOON Witness: OSCAR MAILMROS } AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3247 CONSULATE OF THE U. S. OF AMERICA AT BICTOU, N. S., CAPE CANso AGENCY June 16th 1877. This is to certify that before me, the undersigned, Oscar Malmros, U. S. Consul for Pictou N. S. and the dependencies thereof, personally ap- peared the above named Solomon Cohoon and on said 16th of June at Cape Canso Voluntarily made and subscribed the foregoing Solemn Declaration. - | OSCAR MAILMROS U. S. Consul No. 174. I Thomas C. Cook of Cape Canso in the Province of Nova Scotia do Solemnly declare that I now am and for the last Twenty years, have been a Merchant transacting business at this port, and am well ac- Quainted with the business transacted by American Codfishing vessels frequenting this port, and to my knowledge American fishing vessels do not fish Codfish at all within three miles from the shores, and very rare cases if any mackarel by seines within that distance, and from the changes in the methods of fishing of late years, the inshore fisheries are less important than formerly— I am not aware that American fishermen make any use of the Shores of the British Provinces for the purpose of drying nets or curing fish— Fresh bait, fishing supplies, and outfits of all kinds are purchased at all convenient harbours on the Coasts of Nova Scotia to a large extent, at this port and harbors within two three or hours sail—the amount expended for the above purpose reaches the aggregate Amount of Twenty to Twenty Five thousand Dollars Annually— The United States markets are now the only markets for the Number One Salmon, Number One and Two Mackerel, and for nearly all the fat Herrings produced by the fisheries of the British Provinces, a few only of the Herring of that Class being sent to Canada— It is a fact felt and acknowledged by all engaged in the business that the in-shore fisheries of the British Provinces are less valuable than formerly, the deep sea Codfishery being more advantageously fol- lowed— American fishermen purchase annually at this port and adjacent har- bours—within two or three hours sail—fresh fish for bait—to the Amount of Twelve to fifteen thousand Dollars, and Catch no bait whatever ex- cept on rare occasions a few Squid which are not worth taking into ac- COunt. I Would judge that about half or more of the crews of American fish- ing vessels are residents of the British Provinces. While the presence of American fishermen in the waters of the British provinces is in no respects injurious to the fishermen of said Provinces it is of great pecuniary profit and and advantage to the people of the Dominion of Canada—, - * - And I make this solemn declaration conscientionsly believing it to be true—and by virtue of the Act passed in the Thirty-Seventh Year of Her Majesty's Reign Entitled An Act for the Suppression of Voluntary and Extra judicial oaths, Cape Canso June 16th 1877 TEIOS. C. COOK 3248 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. COUNTY OF GOVSBOROUGH CAPE CANSO I the undersigned Justice of the Peace for the County of Guysborough do hereby certify that the foregoing Statement and declaration was made and Subscribed, before me by the before mentioned Thomas C. Cook - SOLOMON COHOON J. P. No. 175. I, Alfred W. Hart do solemnly declare that I have been a merchant in Cape Canso during the last 16 years that I have been in the habit of supplying American Codfishing vessels at this port—last year I fur- nished supplies to about 100 Am. fish'g vessels the supplies together with moneys furnished them to buy bait aggregating $10,000 or over—the year before was considerably better than last year but my trade with Am. fishing vessels during the last 10 years would average as near as I can come about $10,000 a year—the same vessels that were supplied by me 'no doubt got supplies, especially bait, at other points in the Cana. dian Provinces besides that of Canso—Mackerel & herring fishing vessels are not in the habit of calling here—I am not aware of any injury done. by Am. fishing vessels in the waters of the Provinces but am of opin- ion that their presence in the waters of the Colonies have been of great pecuniary benefit to the people thereof—The only market for No 1 and No 2 mackerel and No 1 Salmon is the United States—the American fishermen do not engage in boatfishing, they catch cod over 3 miles from Shore—the American buy nearly all the bait they obtain here a little perhaps not quite oth part they may catch themselves the presence of Am. fishing fleets alongside of Provincial fishermen does not lessen the catch of the latter—I have never heard of American fishermen having made use of any of the shores of Nova Scotia or the Gulf of St Lawrence for curing fish or drying nets or Seines—I judge that fully one half of the crew of Am. fishing vessels visiting the British Colonial Atlantic waters are British subjects residing in the Dominion of Canada and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing it to be true and by virtue of the Act passed during the 37th year of her Majesty's reign entitlued an Act for the suppression of voluntary & extrajudicial oath Cape Canso C. B. June 16. 1877. * ALFRED W H ART In presence of: * OSCAR MALMROS ! U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF Nova Scotia GUYSBORO’ County, Town OR CAPE CANso Be it remembered that on this 16th day of June in the Year of Our Lord One thousand Eight hundred and Seventy Seven, personally ap- peared before me Thomas C Cook of Cape Canso in the Province of Nova Scotia. Notary Public, Alfred W. Hart, who made and subscribed the foregoing statement and declaration, In testimony whereof I the said Notary have hereunto subscribed my name, and affixed my Notarial Seal at Cape Canso in the Province afore- Said on the day and year aforementioned— * * * - (Seal.) THOS. C. COOK - Not, Pub. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3249 No. 176, My name is James G. McKeen, I am a British subject, have resided at Port Hastings Strait of Canso for the last thirty five years, the greater part of that time I have been engaged Merchandising. I have had considerable dealings with fishermen a large part of my trade was . with American Mackerel and Codfishermen, visiting the Gulf of St. Lawrence, - About ten Years ago when Mackerel were plentiful in the Gulf of St Lawrence, the American Mackerel fishermen purchased fishing supplies largely in the Strait of Canso, such as Barrels, Salt, Bait, Wood, Flour, Beef, Pork, Butter, Lard, Potatoes, Small Stores Clothing, &c. &c. The trade from the American fishing Vessels in the Strait of Canso has been of very great pecuniary advantage to the people of this part of Nova Scotia, I have know American Mackerel fishing Vessels fre- Quently purchase supplies here amounting to from one thousand to fifteen hundred Dollars prSeason. Each, I believe that American fisher- men have been in the habit of buying supplies in the several Harbours along the Coasts of the British Provinces and that they bought fishing Supplies largely in Prince Edwards Island, but I cannot give any approxi- Imate idea of the Amount The Codfishermen for Several Years past purchase also the ordinary Supplies above named, to a large extent, and besides they purchase Ice and large quantities of fresh Herrings and Mackerel for bait all along the Coasts of the Provinces, this supplying of Ice and fresh fish for bait to American Codfishing vessels is becoming quite an extensive business, New Icehouses are being erected every Year around the Coasts of the Provinces. and larger stocks of ice are stored, to be sold principally to the United States fishermen, these fishermen after taking in a supply of ice go for fresh Herring or Mackerel, purchasing from forty to sixty barrels, wherever they are to be had along the Coast, and this “baiting up" as it is called is repeated two or three times each Season, and oftener when Codfish are scarce, these Herring and Mack- erel are sold to the fishermen at from one Dollar and fifty Cents to three Dollars and sometimes higher The American fishing Wessels both the Codfishing and mackerel fleet frequently make considerable expenditures in Ports of the Provinces for repairs to their Vessels and in the purchase of Anchors, Cables, Sails, Spars. &c. &c. , About ten to twelve Years ago from two hundred and fifty to three hundred American fishing vessels passed through the Strait of Canso yearly bound into the Gulf of St Lawrence for the purpose of catching Mackerel, but during the last four or five Years this number has de- creased very much owing as I have understood from the scarcity of Mackerel in the Gulf of St Lawrence and the large catch of Mackerel on the United States coast, last Season there were probably not over Seventy American Mackerel fishing Wessels in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the average Catch of these vessels was reported not to have ex- ceeded one hundred barrels of Mackerel each The bait chiefly used by American Mackerel fishing Vessels is Men- haden or Porgies. these fish are taken I believe entirely on the coast of the United States, and mostly in Seines within three Miles of the land, so I have been informed. British Mackerel fishermen use the same kind of bait principally and depend on the United States for the Supply, clams are also used as bait for Catching Mackerel by both American and Colonial Mackerel fishing vessels, and they are obtained chiefly in the United States, - 204 F. 3250 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Nearly all the Numbers one, and two, and a large part of the Num- ber three Mackerel, number one Salmon, and large quantities of fat and poor Herrings, caught by Provincial fishermen around our Coasts, are shipped to the United States for a Market, that being the best and al- most the only Market for our fat and best fish • I am not aware that the American fishermen use to any appreciable extent the shores of the Provinces for curing their fish or drying Nets The American fishing Vessels employ large numbers of men belong- ing to the Provinces on board their vessels every year, probably over two thousand men yearly, these men go in Mackerel fishing Vessels generally on Shares and in Codfishing Vessels they are chiefly hired receiving fairly remunerative Wages, the employment of so many men on board American fishing Vessels is considered a great advantage to our people in a pecuniary point of view And I James G. McKeen aforesaid do solemnly declare that I con- scientiously believe that the facts contained in the foregoing declara- tion are true and I make this declaration, by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th Year of Eſer Majesty's Reign entitled an act for the suppres- Sion of voluntary and extra judicial Oaths - JAMES G. MCFQEEN I hereby certify that the foregoing statement was signed in my pres- ence by James G. McKeen above named at Port Hastings Nova Scotia. the 13th day of June A D 1877 A B SPKININER, Justice of the Peace for the County of Inverness— No. 177. - I George Bunker do solemnly declare that I am 31 years old—that I am living at Margaret Bay 24 miles from Halifax—I have been em- ployed as a fisherman ever since I was a boy—for 10 seasons I have been master of a fishing vessel fishing in the waters off the American Coasts & those of Nova Scotia, the Gulf of St Lawrence & Magdalen Island for cod and mackerel & herring—cod fish is not at all caught by the Am. fishermen within 3 miles from shore—about 4 of the mackerel caught by the Americans is caught within 3 miles from shore—the catch of mackerel in Provincials waters has much fallen off during the last 5 or 6 years, of late years they are doing hardly anything in mackerel fish- ing in Provincial waters—the crew of American fishing vessels in Pro- vincial waters consist of from # to # of British subjects, residing in the Provinces—the monthly wages of the crew of these fishing vessel would average about $30.1% per man. The Americans buy all the bait they obtain in the Provinces, they do not fish for bait here themselves—an American fishing schooner of say from 70 tons to 85 tons would leave in the provinces from $200 to $300.9% for bait, ice, fuel & provisions that is if such schooner called only once during the season at a port of the ProV- inces & did not land cargo for re-shipment—I do not think that the Canadian fisheries have sustained any injury on account of the fishing of the Americans nor that that the catch of Provincial fishermen has been less on account of fishing along side of an American fishing fleet— It costs fully one third more to fit,-out man & furnish an American fishing vessel than a Provincial—The Americans make no use of the shores of the Provinces for curing fish and but very seldom for the pur- pose of drying nets—codfish is not caught by Americans within 3 miles from shore—the Americans fish for mackerel in the Provincial Waters AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3251 but very little before the month of July because up to that time the mackerel are poor and lean—Ibelieve that if the Provincials had as much enterprise and invested as much capital in fishing & fishing vessels as the Americans that the privilege of fishing in Am. waters north of the 39th degree of latitude would be as valuable to them as the right to fish in Provincial waters is to the Americans There can be no doubt that the presence of American fishermen in the waters of the Provinces is of Very great benefit to the People thereof as they expend a great deal of money for clothing, provisions & supplies of all kinds, and I make this Solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be' true and by Virtue of an Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign entituled “An Act for the suppression of voluntary and extrajudicial Oaths Cape Canso June 16th 1877. - * CAPT GEORGE BUNIKER In presence of OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul I Thomas C Cook of Cape Canso in the Province of Nova Scotia No- tary Public do hereby certify unto all whom it may concern that the above and foregoing declaration and Statement was made and sub- Scribed in my presence by the above named George Bunker on the day of the date thereof - In testimony whereof I the said Notary have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed my Notarial Seal at Cape Canso aforesaid this Six- teenth day of June in the Year of Our Lord One thousand Eight hun- dred and Seventy Seven— (Seal.) TEIOS. C. COOK \ - Not. Pub. , No. 178. Francis Marmeau of Arichat being sworn says: I have been engaged in Arichat in General Merchandising for about 22 years and am well acquainted with the general trade of this Port and with everything connected with the fisheries I have also been in the habit of supplying American fishing vessels calling at this Port—the average number of American fishing vessels calling at this Port during the last five years was about two hundred the year—they call for bait and ice and get the former at this place or on the coast of this Island i. e Isle Madame— take one with another and each vessel during that time has bought at each call about sixty dollars worth of bait—the bait consists in fresh herring and mackerel, the herring costs them in the spring about 50 cents a hundred and from the 1st of July the herring costs about $1.1%% a hundred—for mackerel they pay about 5 or 6 dollars a barrel—the Am fishing vessels never catch there bait here in the bay, they always buy it—for ice each vessel during said period has expended at this Port about from fifteen to twenty-five dollars at $2.1% a ton for the ice—the American fishing vessels calling here in the spring and Summer don’t buy anything else here than ice and bait—about 10 Am. herring fishing vessels call here late in the fall on their way to the Newfoundland Shore and at that time they do not buy any bait or ice but buy considerable Quantities of beef pork mutton potatoes and country wollen cloth manu- factured by the country people butter and other articles, each Vessel expends here on an average for those articles in the fall before going to the fisheries for the winter trip fully five hundred dollars or over—the entire number of young fishermen who annually are engaged by the 3252 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. American fishing vessels calling at this Port is part of the crew of the American vessels during the season is fully 300 from Isle Madame alone—these young men return to their homes after the fishing Sea- son—the presence of the American fishing fleet on our coasts is of great pecuniary advantage to our people and does not injuriously affect any of the interests of our people. The vessels i. e. Am vessels I have Sup- plied for their fishing tour amount to about 5 or 6 vessels per season— I have never seen or heard of American fishermen drying their nets on the coasts of these Provinces and of but one American fishing vessel have dried fish on Our coasts. g f FRS MARMEAU Subscribed & sworn to before me this 28th day of July 1877 OSCAR MAILMROS U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA ARICHAT, County of RICHMOND At Arichat in said Richmond County on this 28th day of July 1877 the above named Francis Marmeau made and subscribed in my presence the foregoing affidavit Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Arichat aforesaid (Seal.) JAMES G MCEQEEN Notary Public No. 179. w I, James L. Girrois do solemnly declare that: I am living at Arichat, Isle Madame—the extent of the Island is 7 miles by 14 miles—I am mas- ter of the schooner Maggie of this Port (Arichat)—I am well acquainted with the trade of the Port having always lived here—from 250 to 300 American fishing vessels, mostly codfishing have called here on an average each season during the last five years—they take in here ice and bait—each vessel buys bait here to the amount of about 50 barrels of mackerel and herring for the herring they pay about $1.1%; a hundred and for the mackerel about $5,9% a barrel the average cost of bait per barrel herring & mackerel will cost them about $2;º, a barrel—they also take in each on an average about 5 or 6 tons of ice costing from $2.50 to $3.9% per ton—fully three hundred of the fishermen ship in American fishing vessels from Isle Madame, going mostly in the Spring to Gloucester for that purpose—I am of the opinion that the coming of American fishermen to our coasts to fish is a good thing for the Prov- inces as they spend considerable money in our ports and give employ- ment to a great many of our fishermen and I make this solemn declara- tion conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of her Majesty's reign entituled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra-judicial oaths. Dated Arichat Isle Madame July 29th 1877. JAMES L. G-IRROIS Master Schr Maggie In presence of: OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul. PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA WEST ARICHAT COUNTY OF RICHMOND At West Arichat in said Richmond County on this 29th day of J uly AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3253 1877 the above named James L. Girrois made and Subscribed the fore- going Solemn declaration before me Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Arichat aforesaid this 29th day of July 1877 . (Seal.) JAMES G MC KEEN Notary Public No. 180. - I Isidore Le Blanc do swear that I am a general merchant doing busi- neSS at Arichat Isle Madame, almost the only or at least by far the prin- cipal business of this place is the fishing interest—I don’t think that capital invested in fishing vessels owned in this Island (Isle Madame) has cleared during the last five years on an average over five per cent profit I think that during the period just named about three hundred American fishing vessels have called per annum at this Port and bought On this Island on an average each about $200 worth of fresh bait, con- Sisting in herring and mackerel and I think about $15 to $20,90% worth of ice per vessel although as to this latter article I am not sure—I know that about 100 of our young fishermen go each year in April & May to Gloucester to secure good berths on fishing, mostly codfishing, vessels— they return to the Island after the end of the fishing season—they fish on Shares and do well at it I think that the coming of American fish- ing vessels to our coasts advances the prosperity of our people and does not interfere with any of its interests. So help me God. . Dated Arichat July 29th 1877. ISIDC RE LE BLANC Subscribed & sworn to before me July 29th 1877 } OSCAR MALMROS - U. S. Consul - PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA ARICHAT, COUNTY OF RICHMOND At Arichat in said Richmond County on this 29th day of July 1877 the above named Isadore Le Blance made and subscribed in my pres- ence the foregoing affidavit * * Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Arichat aforesaid the 29th day of July 1877 Seal.) JAMES G. McKEEN (Seal. Notary Public No. 181. I, Simon P. Le Blanc do solemnly declare that I am shipping master at West Arichat Isle Madam—I have lived here since I was born I know that about one hundred American fishing vessels call annually at the Ports of Arichat and West Arichat, besides a great number of American fishing vessels buy bait on the Island without entering any harbor—on an average each Am. fishing vessel during the last five or six years has bought bait on the Island to the amount of between twenty five and thirty barrels, sometime the same vessel will call three or four times during the same season and each time take in a similar quantity of bait, the price of the bait averages about between three and four dollars per barrel for the herring and about ($7.1%) for the mackerel per barrel—they take mostly herring it being most common in the Spring but they prefer mackerel—each vessel takes about from five to eight tons of ice, those who go halibut fishing take from 30 to 40 tons of ice—the price of ice here is from two to three dollars per ton—I think 3254 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. that fully one hundred fishermen go every spring to Gloucester U. S. A. to go codfishing mostly in American fishing vessel, besides a consider- able number are shipped during the season from this Island in Am. fishing vessels—I am of the opinion that the presence of American fish- ing vessels on the coasts of the Province is of great pecuniary advan- tage to our people because they spend much money on our coasts and give employment to many of our fishermen and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of her Majesty's reign entitled An Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra judicial Oaths. - . S. P. LEBLANC Dated West Arichat July 29th 1877. - In presence of: OSCAR MAILMROS U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA WEST ARICHAT, County OF RICHMOND At West Arichat in Said County of Richmond on this 29th day of July 1877 the above named S. P. Leblanc made and Subscribed the fore- going solemn declaration before me Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Arichat aforesaid this 29th July 1877 (Seal.) - JAMES G McKEEN Notary Public No. 182, I Simon Theriot do solemnly declare that I reside at West Arichat, Isle Madame, N. S., that I am engaged as a general trader and dealer in fish that I have been the owner of a fishing vessel engaged in Codfishing on the grand banks of Newfoundland the vessel was out fishing in 1875 and 1876 and made no returns for the capital and labor invested in her —many others were ready to engage in fishing and investing capital in fishing vessels but when I did not succeed they concluded that it was no use to try and do any business in that line—I know of no person Who invested capital in fishing vessels in this place and who did well in it— not one—about 150 American fishing vessels have as far as I am able to make a rough estimate visited Isle Madame each season on an average dur- ing the last three years and bought bait each to the average amount One hundred dollars; they the American vessels never catch any bait on these coasts—I have never known them to dry their nets or cure their fish on our coasts—each Am. fishing vessels on an average takes in at at A richat about 6 to 10 tons of ice—last year they, the ice merchants sold ice at $4%% a ton, now they sell it at $2.1%; a ton And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an act passed during the 37th year of her Majesty's reign en- titled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra judicial Oaths. West Arichat July 29th 1877. - - SIMON TERRIO In presence of: - OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF Now A SCOTIA WEST ARICHAT, County OF RICHMOND At West Arichat in said County of Richmond on this 29th day of July Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3255 1877 the above named Simon Terrio made and subscribed the foregoing Solemn declaration before me Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Arichat aforesaid this 29th day of July 1877 , or JAMES G. MCREEN (Seal.) Notary Public No. 183. - PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA } COUNTY OF RICHMOND I, William LeVesconte of D'Escouse in Isle Madam Cape Breton Merchant do declare as follows— That for the past twenty five years I have been engaged in the fishing business in this Island—supplying vessels and fishermen for the deep Sea and other fisheries—and from my knowledge and experience there- in, I do estimate that the number of fishermen who have left this Island to serve in American fishing vessels—returning to their homes at the close of the season for the past five years—to average two hundred— That there has been a large amount of bait procured on this Coast by American fishing vessels but I cannot form any correct estimate as to quantity - That the British fishing vessels have, in this locality, yielded a profit of at least twenty five per cent during the period above mentioned— That certain advantages have been derived by the resident fishermen from the calling of American vessels for bait and other necessaries to the extent of the amount expended herefor— That I do not consider the interests of British fishermen on this coast have been interfered with by those in American vessels to any extent— And lastly, I do not know of any American vessel curing her fish on this coast and only in one instance of the fact of drying her nets I make the above declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true— & tº WILLM LEVESCONTE. Signed and declared to before me this 30th day of July AD. 1877. at Descouse W. R.; CUTLER Notary Public N O. 184. • PROVINCE OF NOVA sº COUNTY OF RICHMOND I Charles Doyle of Rocky Bay in Isle Madam do declare as follows— that I am a fisherman and have been engaged in that business regularly for the past thirty years—That a large quantity of fish are taken in this locality by nets and it is a great resort for American Bank vessels to procure bait during the fishing season That in my opinion at least one hundred vessels have on an average, for the past five years, been ‘baited’ in this Bay and adjacent harbors of the Island—and have annually purchased at least Twenty five hun- dred barrels of herring and mackerel for that purpose—paying therefor at the rate of three dollars, per barrel for herring and six dollars per barrel for Mackerel—That most of those vessels are provided with ice When they come here from ports outside of this Island— That large advantages are gained by the fishermen from the fact of , their vessels calling here for bait and supplies all of which are paid for in cash 3.256 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION That no interference is given to the British fishermen in the prose- cution of their calling by the American vessels as they only remain sufficiently long to procure their necessaries and then leave immediately for the Banks • That no American fishermen have set nets or dried them—or cured fish on this part of the coast within my knowledge—I make the above declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true - CELARLES DOYLE Signed and declared to before me this 30 day of July 1877. at Rocky Bay W. R. CUTLER, Notary Public Nova Scotia. No. 185. PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA } COUNTY OF RICHMOND —I David Gruchy of Descouse in Isle Madam Cape Breton Merchant do hereby declare that I have been thirty three years engaged in the fishing business of this Island— —that from my knowledge and experi- ence therein I estimate the number of fishermen who have left this Island to join American vessels—and who return at the close of season —Averaging the last five years One hundred and fifty— the past two years there has been far less than formerly— That a large quantity of bait has been procured by American vessels around the coast of this Island. The British fishing vessels in this locality have yielded a profit of over twenty per cent during the period above mentioned y That the resident fishermen have derived advantages from the fact of American vessels calling here for bait and supplies—to the extent of the sums paid therefor - That the interests of British fishermen, on this coast have not been interfered with in my opinion to any extent And lastly I know of no American vessels curing fish or drying nets on this coast since I have been in the business here— I make the above declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true— D. GRUCHY. Signed and declared to before me at Descouse this 30th July. 1877. W. R. CUTLER, - Notary Public Nova Scotia, No. 186. John Grant being duly sworn SayS: I am living at Hawkesbury on the Strait of Canso I am sixty four years old—I am by occupation a fisherman and pilot—for 40 years I have been a fisherman in over 20 American fishing vessels in the Gulf of St Law- rence—duringthe last six years the mackerel fishing has much fallen off— about 10 to 15 years ago the mackerel were very plentiful and I remem- ber to have seen as many as 700 American sails in the Gulf during some seasons. During those years there were only about 50 Provincial vessels in the Gulf—during those years Provincial vessels went mostly codfish- ing on the coasts of Labrador they had not the vessels fit for mackerel fish- ing and did not understand the business of mackerel fishing Very Well that AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3257 is about 15 years or 20 years ago—last year was the slackest fishing season I have seen ; I think there were nearly one hundred american fishing ves- Sels in the Gulf and about 10 Provincial vessels fishing for mackerel—I don’t think that a single vessel made two trips during the year and not many of them had a full cargo, many in fact not over 50 barrels. Dur- ing the four seasons preceding the last there were about 120 American Sails on an average during each season in the Gulf fishing for mackerel and about 15 to 20 Provincial vessels but the vessels did not well dur- ing any of those years—when I was with the Americans, that is, em- ployed on their fishing vessels, we caught most of the mackerel outside of line 3 miles from shore, we caught them outside of sight of land en- tirely on Bank Bradley and Bank that is from 20 to 30 years ago. —Ten (10) to 15 years ago we caught the mackerel in the American ves- Sels I was in off the East Point Prince Edward Island and off New Lon- (lon P. E. I. and off Cascumbec P. E. I. about 8 to 10 miles off and the Same distance off the North Cape P. E. T.; during the last 8 years the Americans caught most of their mackerel on the North Side of Prince Edward Island about 5 to 8 miles off the coast—they have caught but a Small proportion of their entire catch inside 3 miles from shore certainly not more than one fourth of their entire catch inside 3 miles from shore and they caught that portion in the fall of the year—the American fishing Vessels make most of the business that there is in the Strait of Canso, when there are but few American fishing vessels in our waters trade in the Strait is slack and money is scarce; during many years the only money We Saw Was Yankee money they buy a great deal of country produce as beef, mutton potatoes, all kinds of other vegetables, homespun cloth, Socks & mittens made by the country people and other things besides buying largely store goods of various kinds and they give employment to a Very great many of our fishermen besides to coopers and other me- chanics—particularly during the last 10 or 15 years a great proportion of the crew of the American fishing fleet is composed of Colonial people, I mean such as have not removed their place of living to the States. I think it is of great advantage to the people of these Provinces that the American fishermen should visit our coasts and fish there as much as they please they do no injury to our fishing and nearly half of our fish- ermen Would be out of employment if the Americans did not employ them in their vessels. JOHN GRANT Subscribed & sworn to before me this 27th day of July 1877. OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA PORT HASTINGS, COUNTY OF in V1.1.NESS At Port Hastings in said County of Inverness on this 27th day of July 1877 the above named John Grant made and subscribed in my presence the foregoing affidavit Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Port Hastings aforesaid the 27th day of July 1877 *. º (Seal.) - JAMES G M CEQEEN & Notary Public No. 187. - Patrick Walsh being duly sworn says: I am about 35 years old am living near McGuire's at Steep Creek Guysboro Co, Nova Scotia have been fishing in vessels, mostly Ameri- 3258 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. can vessels during the 21 years next preceding last year, I did not go last year because mackerel were too scarrce in the Bay—the big Ameri- can fleet does not leave home until after the 4th of July for the Gulf of St Lawrence to fish for mackerel mackerel don’t begin to get fat un- til the middle of August—the bait used by both Provincial and Ameri- can vessels is Pogies and clam & these come all from the United States, exceptionally a Provincial vessel may use herring but this is not a good bait—the average number of vessels fishing for mackerel in the Gulf during the rebellion in the States was about 300 or 400 and about 30 to 40 (thirty to forty) Provincial vessels—during most of the years I was out mackerel fishing the Provincial vessels were about one tenth of the number of American vessels fishing for mackerel in the Gulf—fishing alongside of an American mackerel fleet would not lessen the catch of Provincial vessels provided the latter had as good bait and vessels as well fitted out as the Americans—the average number of hands employed on an American mackerel catcher is about 14 or 15 hands—during the last 6 or 7 years the mackerel fishery in the Gulf of St Lawrence has much fallen off—I don’t think that the average catch during that period was more than one fifth part per year of the quantity Caught say ten years ago and during the ten years next preceding the season of ten years ago—I think that both Provincial vessels as well as American vessels catch more mackerel outside a line three miles from shore taking one year with another than they catch inside that line—T never fished near land for codfish in the Gulf but always out of sight of land—their bait for codfishing in the North Bay they, the Americans, buy mostly from Provincial fishermen along the British coasts—they mostly buy herring by the hundred paying about one dollar to $1.1% a hundred, this pays the Provincial fishermen much better than salting the herring and putting them in barrels—I think about one half of the crew of American fishing vessels in the Gulf are men having their homes in the British Provinces—it is a great advantage that the Ameri- can fishing vessels come to our coasts as they leave much money among. Our people. Steep Creek August 7. 1877 his PATRICK -- WALSH mark In presence of * JAMES G. MGECEEN OSCAR MALMROS PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA COUNTY OF GUYS BOROUGH I hereby Certify that the above named Patrick Walsh before me made Oath to . . . . . . subscribed the foregoing statement. Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Steep Creek in the County of G sborough Province of Nova Scotia this 7th day of August 1877 (Seal.) * - JAMES G. MGECEEN . Notary Public No. 188. George Critchet being duly sworn says: I am living at Middle Milford Guysboro County Nova Scotia—I am 37 years old from my 18th year until 4 years ago I have been out mackerel—and cod-fishing mostly in American vessels—I left off fishing because the mackerel fishing had been poor for several years and is still ; Whenever mackerel get to be plenty again I will be out fishing in vessels I think that in former years, AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. . 3259 say from 10 years ago and longer the average number of the American mackerel fleet was upwards of three hundred during the season—during the same period about 30 or 40 Provincial vessels were in the Gulf of St Lawrence—the number of American vessels above referred to is intended as the number in the Gulf of St Lawrence—during the years previous to the last 10 years the average catch of mackerel was two trips for each vessel—during the last 6 or 7 years they have scarcely averaged one full cargo during the season—I think that mackerel go where they find the best and largest quantity of feed and that when the wind if off shore it drives the small fish on which mackerel feed into deeper water and the mackerel follow them and whenever there is a big fleet off shore and heave over much bait the mackerel will follow the fleet—during the years I was out fishing We did better outside a line 3 miles from shore than inside that line—on an average, I am of the opinion, about from 4 to #d of all mackerel caught by vessels in the Gulf is caught outside of a line 3 miles from shore—I think that seine-fishing is very injurious to the mackerel fishery and ought to be prohibited entirely— I hope the Halifax Fishery Commission will recommend a treaty abolish- ing Seine-fishing—it has never proved profitable in the Gulf of St Law- rence—the Seines are about 25 fathoms deep and there are but few places in the Gulf deep enough for seine fishing—until the present season there were only two or three seine-fishers in the Gulf—the only balt used by mackerel fishers is clam and Porgies and that comes all from the United States—I have been out codfishing in the Bay i. e. Gulf of St Lawrence— the codfish caught by vessels in that Bay is all caught in deep water that is more than three miles from shore—the bait used for codfishing is herring and mackerel—this is mostely bought by American vessel from Provincial store-fishers—the spring-herring bait is bought per barrel at the rate of $1.50 to $2.00 each, fat herring is mostly bought by the hun- dred at the rate of about a dollar a hundred and $2.50 per hundred fresh mackerel (300 spring mackerel per barrel) generally it pays the boat- fishers better to sell the fish fresh to the codfishers than to salt and pack them—I don’t think that Provincial vessels catch any less mackerel on account of fishing alongside of an American fleet—I don’t think that the American fishermen dry nets or cure fish on the British coasts, at least I have never seen them do it—I think that about one third of the crew of American fishing vessels visiting the Gulf are men having their homes in the British Provinces. I think that the presence of American fishing vessels on our Coasts is of considerable pecuniary advantage to our people and does not in any way interfere with their interests. * Dated Middle Millford, Guysboro Co. Aug 7th 1877 • * GEORGE CRITOEIETT In presence of: OSCAR MALMROS } PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA. COUNTY OF GUYS BOROUGH. I hereby Certify that the above named George Critchett before me made oath to and subscribed the foregoing statement Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Middle Milford in the County of Guysborough Province of Nova Scotia this 7th day of August 1877 $ (Seal.) JAMES G. MGKEEN * Notary Public 3260 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 189. I Christopher Carrigan do solemnly declare that I am twenty years old—am by occupation a fisherman and that I am living at Lower Mil- ford in the County of Guysborough in the Province of Nova Scotia. I have been out mackerel fishing in the North Bay during the six years next preceding the Summer of 1876—during the time I was fishing in the North Bay I think the American Mackerel fleet fishing in the North Bay would average about one hundred Vessels, the Vessels in which I was fishing during that time averaged per Season I think a Catch of about 200 barrels per Season. I think that during the 6 years I was in the North Bay the Mackerel fleet from the Provinces fishing in the North Bay was about 20 vessels -- - Provincial Mackerel fishing Vessels would—catch as many fish when side by side with American fishing vessels as if fishing by themselves— I do not know how many of the hundred American Vessels named above were Mackerel fishers and how many were Codfishers the Vessels in which I was Mackerel fishing used Porgies & Clams only as bait I have been two trip in the North Bay in Provincial Mackerel fishing Vessels and they also used only Porgies & Clams for bait. As far as I know the Americans do not cure their fish or dry their nets On the Coasts of the British Provinces I was out this spring & last spring in American Herring fishing Ves- sels to the Magdalens I think there were from 30 to 40 American Her- ring fishing Vessels there. Each Spring these Vessels Employ on an average two Men and two Boats from the British Provinces and pay on an average for Each Man & Boat about 30 dollars for the trip lasting about 3 weeks this Spring the American Herring Vessels at the Magda- len Islands did not average a Catch of over 300 barrels Each last Spring they all had full fares averaging about one thousand barrels The presence of the American fishing Wessels during the season around the Coasts of the British Provinces is a great pecuniary advantage to the people of these Provinces from the large amount of money they ex- pend among us and the large number of our men they employ in their Vessels And (I do solemnly declare that) I make this solemn declaration con- scientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th Year of Her Majesty's Reign entitled an Act for Sup- pression of Voluntary and Extra-judicial Oaths {. Dated at Lower Milford County Guysborough this 8th day of August 1877 CEIRISTOPEIER. CARRIGAN In presence of: OSCAR MALMROS PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA County of GUYSBOROUGH I hereby Certify that the above named Christopher Carrigan volun- tarily declared to and Subscribed before me the foregoing solemn de- claration - t - .* Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Lower Milford in the County of Guysborough Province of Nova Scotia this 8th day of August 1877 * 'ſ (Seal.) JAMES G. MCFCEEN Notary Public AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3261 No. 190. William T. England being duly sworn says: I am fifty six years old, live at middle Millford Guysboro’ County N. S. since I was 11 years old up to about 7 years ago I have been out fishing in fishing vessels, mostly American vessels, that is I have been fishing in vessels for 40 years, during the last 7 years I have been boat fishing and farming—as far as I know the Americans don’t dry their nets on the British Coasts nor do they cure their fish on them—the bait used for mackerel is Porgies and clams and these all come from the United States—herring is now but very rarely used for bait and never except by Provincial vessels—the bait for codfish used by Americans in the Gulf of St Lawrence is mostly caught by themselves on the fishing grounds by the Americans and Caught consequently in the deep seas—I have often sold bait to the Americans going to the grand banks of Newfoundland codfishing—the Codfishers going to the grand banks buy nearly all the bait they use, they use during the trip from 30 to 40 barrels of herring, buying it partly by the barrel, but often by the hundred—the hundred costs them from one dollar to one dollar and a quarter; it is much more profitable to the fishermen to sell their fish to the Bankers for bait than to salt and pack them in barrels and sell them to the merchants—I don’t think that Provincial fishermen catch any less mackerel on account of fishing alongside of an American fleet—during some seasons or rather series of Seasons there are among the mackerel a great many old ones and then the mackerel keep much more off-shore in the deep seas, then fol- lows a series of seasons when old mackerel are very scarce and almost to have disappeared and during such periods the mackerel will keep much more in-shore—those mackerel that are comparatively young always prefer to keep more in-shore—I have never known as Small an American cod-and mackerel fleet in the Gulf of St Lawrence as during the last two years and especially last year because the catch of mack- erel was very poor. The American fleet, leaves every season, especially When mackerel are plenty considerable money among us and are there- fore and because they employ many of our men of considerable benefit to our coasts and as far as I know they don’t do any harm to any of Our interest—all along the Strait of Canso the American fishing vessels that go to the Magdalen Islands herring fishing, about on an average 40 (fourty) sails a season, hire boats and men—they each hire on an average 3 or 4 boats with as many men for an average trip of from 3 to 4 weeks—they pay as high as $30.1% to $35.1% for a man and boat—I myself went this spring with an American herring catcher to the Mag- dalen Islands—I was three weeks away and got $351% for the trip— Dated Middle Millford Guysboro Co. Nova Scotia August 7th 1877 his WILLIAM T. -- ENGLAND mark. In presence of: OSCAR MALMROS PROVINCE OF NOVA Scot1A COUNTY OF GOYSBOROUGH I hereby Certify that the above named William T. England volunta- rily made oath to and subscribed before me the foregoing statement Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Middle Milford in the Co of Guysborough Province of Nova Scotia this 7th day of August 1877 (Seal.) JAMES G. MCREEN tº- Notary Public 3262 AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. NO. 191. I, Martin Ryan do solemnly declare that : I am living at Middle Mil- ford, County of Guysboro’—I am 63 years old—have been fishing in mackerel vessels over thirty years—about 7 years ago I left off Bay- fishing in vessels since that time I have been boatfishing and farming— the Americans do not as far as I know dry their nets or cure their fish on British coasts—Provincial vessels do not according to my experience catch any smaller quantity of mackerel on account of fishing alongside of an American mackerel fleet in the Gulf of St Lawrence—while I was out fishing in the Gulf the Americans, during the time they had the privilege of fishing inshore as well as at other times when they had to fish in limits, caught nearly all their mackerel outside the 3 mile line from shore it was only an odd vessel that went in-shore and caught their mackerel there—the mackerel during most of the years I was in the Gulf mackerel fishing kept mostly in the deep water and not more than one fourth of the entire catch of the American vessels in which I was was caught inside a line 3 miles from shore I have always fished in American vessels with the exception of five seasons when I was fishing in Provincial vessels—the bait used by the mackerel vessels in which I fished was Porgies and clams, we used no other bait—Porgies and clams all comes from the United States—between one third to 4 of the crew of the American fleet of mackerel fishing vessels are men having their homes in the British Provinces—the Americans have much benefited the people here in the Strait of Canso—the American herring fishers that come here in the spring give the first relief to our poor people and if it was not for the American fishing vessels on our coasts a very great number of our laboring men would be without employment, the great number of the American mackerel fleet come to the Gulf of St Lawrence from about the 10th of July-–the mackerel fishery has much fallen off and during the last three years the catch of mackerel has not been a paying one at all; during the last two years mackerel fishing has been almost a failure; and I do solemnly declare that I make this solemn declara- tion conscientiously believing it to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of her Majesty's reign entitled an Act for the Sup- pression of Voluntary and extra-judicial oaths. . Dated Middle Millford August 7th 1877. MARTIN RYAN In presence of: OSCAR MALMROS PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA COUNTY OF GUYS BOROUGH I hereby Certify that the above named Martin Ryan voluntarily de- clared to and subscribed before me the foregoing solemn declaration Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Middle Milford in the County of Guysborough Province of Nova Scotia this 7th day of August 1877 -- (Seal.) JAMES G MC KEEN Notary Public No. 192. I, Philipp Ryan do solemnly declare that: I am living at Middle Mil- ford, I am 42 years of age—I think I was about 16 years when I first went out fishing in the Gulf of St Lawrence in fishing vessels—I have mostly been mackerel fishing although some seasons I have been Cod- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3263 fishing in the Bay—I left off going in fishing vessels in 1872—the Amer- ican fishermen don’t dry their nets nor cure their fish on our coasts as far as I know—during the last 8 or 10 years mackerel fishing has much fallen off and during the last two years as far as I can hear mackerel fishing has almost been a failure—Porgies and clams as far as I know tis universally used in the Bay as bait although a few Provincial vessels may Occasionally use herring—Porgies & clams get all from the States as far as I am aware—I should think that about one half of all the mack- erel caught by vessels is caught outside a line 3 miles from shore and # inside that line—I should say that of late years about one third of the Crew of American fishing vessels was composed of men having their homes in the British Provinces—I should say the cost of outfitting an American fishing vessel is about 4 greater than that of a Provincial Vessel of the same size—And I do solemnly declare that I conscien- tiously believe the foregoing declaration to be true and make this state- ment by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of her Majesty's . entituled An Act for the suppression of voluntary & extra judicial Oath.S. - Dated Middle Milford August 7th 1877. EPEIILIP RYAN In presence of: OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA COUNTY OF GUYSBOROUGH I hereby Certify that the afore named Phillip Ryan voluntarily de- clared to and Subscribed before me the foregoing Solemn declaration Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Middle Milford in the County of Guysborough Province of Nova Scotia this 7th day of August 1877 - (Seal.) - JAMES G M CEQEEN Notary Public No. 193. I Andrew Lourie do solemnly declare that I am living at Lower Mil- ford Guysboro County, Nova Scotia I am a fisherman by occupation I have been fishing in the Gulf of St Lawrence about thirty years up to 5 years ago—I am 56 years of age the American fishing fleet fishing for mackerel begin to arrive in the North Bay about the middle of June but the greater number of mackerel vessels don't leave the States until after the 4th of July–Pogies and clams are the bait used for mackerel fishing, herring is only used as bait when the vessels are out of Pogies & claims—herring is not as good a bait as pogies and clams—I have never seen American fishermen dry their nets or cure fish on the shores of British Provinces—the fishing alongside of American mackerel ves- sels don’t lessen in my opinion the catch of mackerel by Provincial ves- Sels I think they catch quite as many when fishing side by side of American vessels—of late years I have heard that more mackerel are caught in-shore but when I went fishing the heft of mackerel that were caught were caught outside a line three (3) miles from shore—I have also often been codfish- ing in the Bay—the codfish is all caught outside a line three miles from shore—the bait used for codfishing is herring mackerel, Squid and clams in the spring—the American Codfishers in the Bay procure their bait in the spring at the Magdalen Islands from the shore fishermen and in Summer they catch their own bait wherever they may happen to be fish- 3264 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. ing—I think that the presence of American fishing vessels on our coasts is a pecuniary advantage to our people as they spend much money and give employment to many of our people And I make this solemn declara- tion conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extra-judicial oaths. Dated at Lower Milford August 8th 1877. ANDREW LAURIE In presence of: OSCAR MALMEROS PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA COUNTY OF GUYS BOROUGH I hereby Certify that the above named Andrew Lowrie voluntarily declared to and Subscribed the foregoing Solemn declaration before me Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Lower Milford in the County Guysborough. Province of Nova Scotia this 8th day of August 1877 - (Seal.) JAMES G MC KEEN Notary Public No. 194. I Thomas England do Solemnly declare that I am living at Middle • Milford, Guysborough County Nova Scotia, I am about 29 Years old— during the last 10 Years I have been out Mackerel fishing and during one of those 10 Seasons I have been also Codfishing in the Gulf of St Lawrence—I have mostly been netfishing in the Spring and hookfishing during the summer—I suppose that Provincial vessels fishing alongside of American Mackerel Catchers would not on that account catch a ' smaller quantity of Mackerel that they would do otherwise—Porgies and Clams are the bait used by Mackerel vessels—occasionally a Pro- vincial vessel may use a little herring as bait.—My own experience is that more Mackerel are caught outside a line 3 miles from shore than inside that line—the Americans don't dry their nets on the British Coasts or cure their fish there as far as I am aware—the American fish- ing fleet especially when Mackerel are plenty leave considerable Money on Our Coasts and I think that their presence on these Coasts are of great pecuniary advantage to our people And I make this Solemn declaration Conscientiously beleiving the same to be true and by Virtue of an Act passed during the 37th Year of Her Majesty's Reign entitled An Act for the Suppression of Volun- tary and Extrajudicial Oaths. - Dated at Middle Milford in the County of Guysborough N S. August 7, 1877 - his THOMAS X ENGLAND mark In presence of: OSCAR MALMROS PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA COUNTY OF GUYS BOROUGH I hereby Certify that the above named Thomas England declared to and subscribed the foregoing solemn declaration before me Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Middle Milford in the County of Guysborough N. S. this 7th day of August 1877 (Seal.) JAMES G MCEQEEN Notary Public AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3265. No. 195. I am forty six years of age and a fisherman by occupation, I am liv- ing at Lower Milford Guysboro County Nova Scotia. I have been fish- ing in the North Bay about 14 years up to and inclusive of the season of 1873 whenever I was not out fishing in vessels I have been boat- fishing I have never seen American fishermen dry their nets or cure fish on the shores of the British Provinces—I do not think that a Pro- Vincial vessel if well fitted out will catch a less quantity of mackerel on account of fishing alongside of an American mackerel fleet—I should think that fully one third of the crew of the American fishing fleet fish- ing off the Coasts of the British North American Provinces is composed of natives who are residents of these Provinces—the bait used for mack- erel catching is clams and porgies and these all come from the United States—herring is but rarely used as a bait for mackerel—the codfish caught by the American vessels is all caught in the deep seas more than 3 miles from land their bait consists in fresh herring or mackerel—in the spring they buy it from Provincial boat fishers on the coasts of the Brit- ish Provinces and during the rest of the season they mostly catch their bait in nets on the deep seas where they happen to be for cod-fishing— the American Mackerel fleet begins to arrive in the North Bay about the middle of June but the greatest number of the American Mackerel fleet do not leave home for the Bay until after the 4th day of July–About 7 or 8 years ago the mackerel fishery in the North Bay began to fall off and the last two years were particularly bad—ten years ago and up- wards the average catch of mackerel consisted in about 2 full fares for each vessel but during the last 6 or 7 years I don’t think that mackerel Vessels averaged one full fare during the season—I think that the pres- ence of American fishermen on our coasts has pecuniarily benefited our people as they spend considerable money and give employment to many of our men And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believ- ing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign entituled an Act for the suppression of volun- tary and extrajudicial oaths. Dated Lower Milford August 8th 1877 - RUFUS CARRIGAN PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA County OF GUYSBOROUGH I hereby Certify that the above named Rufus Carrigan voluntarily declared to and subscribed before me the foregoing solemn declaration Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Lower Milford in the County of Guysborough Province of Nova Scotia this 8th day of August 1877 .* (Seal.) JAMES G MC KEEN Notary Public No. 196. I Edward Walsh do solemnly declare that I am living at Lower Mil- ford Guysboro County, Nova Scotia, I am by occupation a fisherman— for ten or twelve years I have been fishing in American vessels from about 1853 to 1865 since that time I have been net-fishing except one Season 5 years ago When I was out fishing in a Nova Scotia vessel in the North Bay—the mackerel fishers from the United States begin to arrive in the North Bay about the 15th of June but the greater number of American Mackerel catchers don’t arrive until after the 4th of July— 205 F. 3266 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. during late years the mackerel runs closer into the land but formerly When mackerel were still plenty say 10 to 15 years ago about as many mackerel were caught both by Provincials and Americans outside a line 3 miles from shore as there were in-shore—the American Codfishers in the North Bay get their bait in the spring from the fishermen on the coasts of Nova Scotia and the Magdalen Islands; during the summer the American Codfishers in the Bay catch their own bait on the deep Seas wherever they may happen to fish—I think on an average an American Codfisher in the North Bay buys about 30 barrels of herring on the coasts of the Provinces for bait—I think that the presence of American fishermen on our coasts of considerable pecuniary advantage to Our people as they spend much money and employ many of our men. And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of Her Majesty’s reign entitled An Act for the suppression of voluntary and extrajudicial oaths Dated at Lower Milford Guysboro County N. S. August 8th, 1877 EDWARD WELSEI PROVINCE OF NO WA SCOTIA COUTY OF GOYSBOROUGH I hereby Certify that the above named Edward Walsh voluntarily declared to and subscribed before the foregoing Solemn declaration Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Lower Milford in the County of Guysborough Province of Nova Scotia this 8th day of Au- gust 1877. (Seal.) w JAMES (; MGREEN .* * Notary Public No. 197. I, Charles Lowrie do solemnly declare that I am living at Middle Millford County of Guysboro Province of Nova Scotia—I am a fisher- man by occupation, I am 45 years old ; about 20 years ago I went first fishing in vessels in the Gulf of St Lawrence and since that time I have been out in the Bay in vessels fishing for Cod and mackerel 10 or 11 seasons—the last season I was Bay fishing was that of the great August storm of 1873 when I was not fishing in vessels I have been boat fishing and I follow that now Some of the American Mackerel vessels come to the North Bay as early as about the 10th of June but the greater number of them don’t leave home for the North Bay until after the 4th of July—I should think that the average size of an American Mackerel is about 60 to 65 tons new measurement—the crew of a mackerel vessel of say 60 tons is about from 15 to 17 hands—during the years previous to the last 10 years the American mackerel vessels in the Bay averaged I think 2 trips a season landing one trip in the Strait of Canso for shipment to the States sometimes however the American vessels went home with their fare and then returned to the North Bay for a second trip—On an average I should say that during seasons when mackerel were plenty as many of them were caught outside a line 3 miles from shore as inside that line both by Provincial and American vessels—Porgies & clams are the bait used for mackerel, some Provincial vessels occasionally use however herring but this is not considered as so good a bait—I do think that Provincial mackerel vessels catch as many mackerel when fishing alongside of an American Mackerel fleet as they do when fishing by themselves provided they are as well fitted out in every respect and have as good bait as the American vessels; this is however often not the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3267 case—the American codfisheries in the North Bay use herring and mackerel as bait, the trawlers buy most of their bait from shore fisher- men but the hook codfisheries catch their own bait on the deep sea wherever they may be fishing—the codfish is all caught by the Ameri- can vessels outside a line 3 miles from shore—the codfishers going to the grand banks of Newfoundland buy nearly all the bait they use of Provincial fishermen they run in usually 2 or 3 times to bait up—some of their bait, especially squid, they catch themselves on the grand banks—it pays the boatfishers better to sell their herring and mackerel to the American Codfishers in the North Bay and on the Grand Banks' than to salt and pack their herring and mackerel because the price they get is usually the same and they save packing, salting and the barrels —I don’t think that the mackerel vessels in the North Bay during the last 5 or 6 years have averaged per season one full fare the mackerel fishery in the Bay having fallen off so much—The fleet of American herring vessels going to the Magdalene Islands averages I should say 15 to 16 vessels each spring, these hire on an average three men and three boats each in this Province for their trip to the Magdalenes' last- ing about 3 weeks paying for a man and his boat from $30 to $35.4%%– one spring while I was there, there were hardly any herring, last season when I was there they averaged about 200 barrels a vessels and during good seasons they will average fully 1000 barrels of herring each—the other Seasons while I was there that is about 5 besides the 3 mentioned the catch of herring was good—I think that about one half of the Crew of American fishing vessels fishing off the coasts of the British North American Provinces consist of men who have their homes in these Provinces. I think the presence of American fishing vessels on our coasts and in our harbors a great pecuniary advantage to our people; and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of an Act passed during the 37th year of Eſer Majesty’s reign entituled an Act for the suppression of voluntary and extrajudicial oaths. Dated Middle Milford August 9th 1877. - - - CHARLES I/OWERIE In presence of : OSCAR MAILMROS PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA COUNTY OF GUYS BOROUGH N. S. I hereby Certify that the above named Charles Lowrie declared to and subscribed the foregoing Solemn declaration before me - Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Middle Milford in the County of Guysborough, Nova Scotia this 9th day of August 1877 (Seal.) * JAMES G. McKEEN Notary Public NO. 198. Nicholas Nicholson says and deposes on oath as follows: I am living at Port Hastings, Strait of Canso, am by trade a fisherman, have during the last six years been out fishing in American fishing vessels—my age is 30 years, I was codfishing I meant to say six years besides having been fishing for mackerel during two seasons, that is, last summer and the Summer of four years ago—the codfish that is caught by the Amer- icans is all caught outside a line 3 miles from shore and of the mackerel, as far as my experience goes, fully two thirds is caught by the Ameri. CanS Outside a line 3 miles from shore and about one third inside that 3268 AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. line—towards the latter part of the season it is that mackerl is caught more inshore—the Americans do not dry their nets on our coasts but preserve them by salting them in hogsheads—I have often seen Ameri- can mackerel fishing vessels and Provincial fishing side by side and my experience is that the vessels of the Provinces catch quite as many mackerel when fishing side by side with an American fleet as they do when not alongside of them—codfishers (American) in the Gulf of St Lawrence catch most of their bait, herring principally, and mackerel in the bay, in nets, much more than 3 miles from shore—the codfishers going to the banks of Newfoundland partly buy their bait at Provincial Ports, about enough to last them three weeks, partly they catch it on the banks, if they can get squids, they prefer it—I think that fully one half of the fishermen of the American vessels fishing off the Coasts of the British Provinces are natives of the British Provinces who continue to live in the Provinces—I think that the American fishing vessels one our coasts is a great benefit to our people because they spend much money among us and give employment to many of our men. NICHOLAS NICEIOLSON PoRT HASTINGs Aug 1st 1877. W - Sworn to & Subscribed before me this 1st day of Aug 1877 } - OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA & PORT HASTINGS COUNTY OF INVERNESS I hereby Certify that the above named Nicholas Nicholson voluntarily made and in my presence subscribed the foregoing affidavit Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Port Hastings aforesaid this 1st day of August 1877 (Seal.) JAMES G. MCIKEEN * Notary Public No. 199. ;: Duncan McEachren being duly sworn says: I am living at Craignish County of Inverness C. B.-I am about 45 years old—this is the 3d sum- mer that I am at home not fishing, 3 years ago I was fishing for mackerel and ever since 1853 up to 3 years ago I have been mackerel fishing every summer mostly in American vessels, the Americans do not as far as I know dry their nets on our coasts nor do they cure their fish on the coasts of the Provinces—take one year with another and I should say that on an average the American mackerel fishing vessels take more mackerel outside a line 3 miles from shore than inside—all the vessels I ever Was in got their bait from the States—when I was out fishing I always saw the Americans raise the mackerel first, they, the mackerel often seemed to follow the American fleet because they throw out much bait—I think that the Provincial fishing vessels catch as much mackerel when fishing side by side with an American fleet than they would or than they do when not fishing along side of the Americans—I suppose that all of two thousand men from the British Provinces that is men who have their homes in the Provinces are annually employed as fishermen in American fishing vessels—it is a benefit to the people of the Provinces that the American vessels visit our coasts because they expend much money in the coasts and give employment to many people. DUNCAN MOEACHERN AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3269 Sworn to and subscribed before me this 2nd day of August 1877 OSCAR MALMROS U S Consul PROVINCE OF Nova Scotia COUNTY OF INVERNESS I hereby Certify that the above named Duncan McEachren voluntarily made and subscribed in my presence the foregoing affidavit at Creignish in the said County this 2nd day of August 1877 Given under my hand and Notarial Seal at Cregnish aforesaid this 2nd day of August 1877 (Seal.) - JAMES G. MCKEEN Notary Public NO. 200. George Laidlaw, being duly sworn says: I am 39 years old; am by occupation a fisherman ; I was out fishing in vessels, mostly American, from 1851 to 1872 inclusive—if fishing were good I would still go out fishing and may do so next season in case mackerel are plenty—two sea- sons or part of them I fished on the American shore—during the time I was out fishing the American fleet in the Gulf of St Lawrence fishing for mackerel would average per year I think nearly 300 vessels—during the first year I was out the fleet of Provincial mackerel vessels in the Gulf was larger than during any of the ten following years—I don’t think that dur- ing that entire time the Provincial vessels would average per year more than fifty sails in the Gulf—the mackerel fisheries fell off much during the last 6 or 8 years—I don’t think that during the last 6 or 8 years more than one quarter of the mackerel have been caught of the quantity caught per Season say 10 years ago—during the last 3 years there were not any mackerel in the Gulf of St Lawrence worth going for—A long time ago, about 18 years, the American mackerel vessels began to come to the Gulf as early as the 5th of June and would come thick about the middle Of June—during the last 10 years the big American mackerel fleet did not leave home until after the 4th of July—during some seasons mack- erl will keep more in-shore during other seasons more off-shore—Amer- ican and Provincial vessels, when the former have the privilege, fish equally much in-shore and off-shore—I think that when the Americans are kept outside a line 3 miles from shore that most mackerel perhaps 3 are caught outside by Provincial vessels because the Americans have a heavy fleet and heave over much bait and the mackerel follow them—I don’t think it hurts the Americans much to be kept outside the 3 mile limits, they catch during the time they are kept in limits about as many mackerel as when they are allowed to fish in-shore—I think about 3 of the mackerel I ever caught were caught outside of the 3 mile line—I think that an American mackerel vessel averages about 70 tons or 75 tons old measurement—the bait for mackerel is Porgies and clam—it is used alike by Provincials and Americans although occasionally the for- mer use also herring but this is an exception—fishing alongside an American fleet does not lessen the catch of mackerel by Provincial ves- Sels, on the contrary the more vessels the more bait and mackerel— I have been codfishing during two seasons or rather part of two seasons fishing for mackerel afterwards—American codfish vessels average a Crew of from 10 to 12 hands—the codfishers going to the grand banks of Newfoundland buy from Provincial people about 40 barrels of fresh her- ring on going to the banks and afterwards catch a small portion of their Supply of bait on the grand banks going again to the British coasts to ) 3270 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. buy bait as they need it—codfish is caught outside the 3 mile line except Once in a While When cod is caught inshore—the Americans as far as mackerel catching goes have according to my estimate at all seasons, when allowed to fish in-shore, caught about #d of their entire catch out. side of the 3 mile line—the codfishers don’t catch any of their bait in- side 3 miles from shore except once in a while and not worth speaking of—the American fishermen don't dry their nets on the British Coasts, they, pickle their nets on their vessels in order to preserve them, nor do they cure their fish on our coasts—the best two seasons I have ever been mackerel fishing were on the American shore and it is my opinion that if the Provincial vessels were as well fitted out as the American and if they employed as many of our most experienced fishermen as the Amer- icans do and had as good bait that the fishery on the American Coasts north of the Chesapeake Bay would be as valuable to Provincials as the British Atlantic shores to the Americans—I think the presence of Amer- ican fishing vessels on our coasts a considerable advantage to our people because they leave a good deal of money Dated Near Low Point Inverness County Aug 4th 1877 GEORGE LAIDLAW Sworn to and subscribed before me this 4th day of August 1877 ...” - OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA COUNTY OF INVERNESS I hereby Certify that the above named George Laidlaw voluntarily made and Subscribed in my presence the foregoing affidavit at Low Point in said County this 4th day of August 1877 f Given under my hand and Notarial Seal this 4th August 1877 (Seal.) JAMES G. MGKEEN - -- Notary Public No. 201. I, Roderick McDonald of Low Point, N. S. do declare and say on oath as follows: I am living at Low Point Inverness Co. Nova Scotia, am over thirty years old, have been fishing for about 12 years until three years ago, when I knocked off because mackerel was scarce in the Bay and it did not pay—the mackerel fishing has much fallen off during the last 6 or 7 years—during these 6 or 7 years the average yearly catch has not been over # of what it was 8 or ten years ago—during some seasons they will be much more off shore at other seasons more inshore—during hot weather they will work more offshore—the best place for mackerel I have ever seen is on Bradley Bank about twenty miles from North Cape P. E. I.-sometimes the Americans when mackerel is plenty will catch about #d of their entire catch outside a line three miles from shore but striking an average I think that during season when mackerel is plenty Americans will catch about one half outside and the other half inside a line three miles from shore—the only bait American Mackerel vessels use is Porgies and clam and that is the bait nearly always used by Provincial vessels but sometimes the latter use herring which is not a good bait and would not do at all to use as bait in fishing alongside of vessels throwing out Porgies & clam—All the Porgies and clam used as bait in the Gulf of St Lawrence comes from the United States—I think the Provincial fishermen catch as many mackerel fishing along- side of an American fleet as they would do if no Americans were in the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3271 Gulf because a large fleet heaves over much bait and raises mackerel better than a small number of vessels could do—I think that about half of our fishermen from Cape Breton and on the Nova Scotia side of the Strait of Canso find employment in American fishing vessels and if they were not so employed they would have very hard times. I think the coming of American fishermen to our coasts is a great benefit to Our people especially when the American fleet in these waters is large. So help me God. his RODERICK -- MCDONALD mark Sworn to & subscribed in presence of JAMES G. MCEQEEN PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA LOW. POINT INVERNESS COUNTY I hereby certify that on the 3d day of August 1877 personally ap- peared before me the above named Roderick McDonald and was by me duly sworn to the above and foregoing Declaration which he subscribed by affixing his mark at the foot of said declaration Attested : OSCAR MAILMROS U. S. Consul. PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA COUNTY OF INVERNESS I hereby Certify That the above named Roderick McDonald volunta- rily made and subscribed in my prence the foregoing affidavit at Low Point in said County. Gived under my hand and Notarial Seal this 3rd day of August 1877 (Seal.) JAMES G. McKEEN, Notary Public. No. 202. I, Daniel McDonald do say on oath that : I am living at Low Point Inverness County Nova Scotia, am a fisherman by occupation, I have been fishing mostly in American but partly also in Nova Scotia fishing ves- sels I knocked off fishing about 4 years ago because the fisheries that is mackerel fishing had so much fallen off that it did not pay to go fish- ing; ever since the last 6 or 7 years the mackerel fisheries have been getting worse—10 or 12 years or longer there were about 400 or 500 American mackerel vessels in the bay of St Lawrence, during the same time there were about a hundred Provincial fishing vessels in the Bay—the only bait used for mackerel, or almost the only, consists in Porgies and clams and these all come from the United States whether used by Provincials or Americans; a few English vessels use also a lit- tle fat herring but this is used in quantities hardly worth mentioning the Americans neither dry their nets nor cure their fish on the British coasts—I don’t think there were over fifty mackerel fishing vessels either Provincials or Americans in the Bay of St Lawrence—I have also been codfishing and know that the codfish caught by Americans is all caught more than 3 miles three miles from shore—during most of the seasons I went fishing by far the greater portion of mackerel caught by the American fishing vessels were caught outside a line 3 miles from shore, in some years the mackerel keep more outside in the deep Sea at other seasons they are found in greater numbers in-shore— of late years the mackerel have kept close to the shore—ten years ago 3272 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. and for many years before that mackerel were much more plenty off. shore, say from 4 to 10 miles from shore and a large proportion were caught still farther off from land—I think that the Provincial vessels in case they are as good and well fitted out as the American would catch as much mackerel and I don’t think that fishing alongside of American fishing vessels interferes with the catch of Provincial vessels, I think they catch quite as many mackerel fishing side by side with the Americans as they would do otherwise—I think that about one half of the crew of the American vessels visiting the Gulf of St Lawrence is composed of Natives of the Provinces who have their homes in these Provinces. The American fishing vessels buy large quantities of veg- etables, meal, and many other articles, they spend much money among people and when the American fishing fleet on our coasts is small money is scarce when there are plenty of American fishing vessels on our coasts there is plenty of money among the people ; and I do solemnly swear that the foregoing statements now made by me are true accord- ing to the best of my belief and knowledge; so help me God. Dated Low Point Inverness Co. August 3d 1877. his DANIEL + MCDONALD mark Subscribed & sworn to before me Aug 3d 1877 OSCAR MAILMROS U. S. Consul PROVINCE OF Now A Scot[A COUNTY OF INVERNESS I hereby Certify that the above namd Daniel McDonald voluntarily made and Subscribed in my presence the foregoing affidavit at Low Boint in said County Given under my hand & notarial Seal this 3rd day of August 1877 (Seal.) JAMES G. MCFQEEN Notary Public No. 203. - I, Dougald McKinnon of Long Point, Inverness County, Nova Scotia, say and depose on oath that: I am living at Long Point, Inverness County Nova Scotia—I have been fishing for about the last twenty years partly in American partly in Provincial vessels, mostly in the former and fishing for mackerel; for part of seven or 8 seasons I have been codfishing in the Bay or on the banks of Newfoundland and after- wards fishing for mackerel—the crew of a mackerel fishing vessel aver- ages 13 or 14 hands—the crew of American codfishing vessels averages now from 10 to 12 hands—the average wages on codfishing vessels are from twenty five to fifty dollars a hand per month according to the ex- perience of each person in a crew—of late years most men go on shares— I should think that about from 4 to 3 of the crew of American fishing vessels is composed of fishermen who are british subjects and living in the British Provinces—during the last 5 or 6 years mackerel fishing has very much fallen off—in this Bayi. e. the Bay of St Lawrence the catch has 1allen off in my opinion over fifty per cent last year it was almost an entire failure—during the times that mackerel were plenty that is before the last ten years much the greater quantity taken by Americans were taken outside a line 3 miles from the shore—but since they have become scarce they have mostly been taken inside that line—I don’t think that Provincial vessels catch any smaller quantity of mackerel on AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3273 account of fishing along side of an American fleet—a large fleet, of ves- sels has a much better chance of finding the mackerel than a few vessels by themselves would have—I would rather take my chance in the Bay mackerel fishing when there were 200"vessels in the Bay than when there are only twenty vessels—according to my estimate the average expenditure of an American fishing vessel in the several ports of the British Provinces during the season would amount to about $200 or over, that is of a vessel making only one trip during the season—in case a vessel lands her cargo on these coasts for re-shipment to the States I should think that all her expenses including a complete re-outfit would average a thousand dollars or over—I think the coming of American fishing vessels to our coasts a greater advantage to our people, especi- ally when the American fishing vessels come in great numbers. the American fishermen do not dry their nets or cure their fish on the coasts of the British Provinces—All the codfish caught by Americans is caught outside a line 3 miles from shore—there are about on an average, taking the last 10 years, from three to four American halibut fishers off the Coasts of the British waters, they, the halibut are as a rule caught out- side a line three miles from shore; it is an exception when they are caught inside that line—The bait for mackerel mostly comes from the States— there is no bait in the Dominion for mackerel fishers—The American codfishers bring their bait partly from home, partly they buy it in the Provinces or catch outside the 3 miles from shore. And I do solemnly declare on oath that according to the best of my knowledge and belief §: above and foregoing statements made by me are true. So help me Od. - } Dated Long Point, Inverness Co. August 2nd 1877. DOUGALD MC KINNON Sworn to and subscribed before me this 2nd day of August 1877 OSCAR MALMROS U. S. Consul |PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA COUNTY OF INVERNESS I hereby Certify that the above named Dougald McKinnon volunta- rily made and subscribed in my presence the foregoing affidavit Given under my hand & Notarial Seal at Long Point County of Inver- ness this 2nd day of August 1877 (Seal.) JAMES G. MCEQEEN - Notary Public NO. 204. DOMINION OF CANADA PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA HALIFAX SS I Moses C. Morgan of Halifax in the County of Halifax in the Prov- ince of Nova Scotia Merchant being solemnly sworn do make oath and say as follows: 1st I say that I am at present a fish dealer in the City of Halifax en- gaged in buying fish for export—and have been so engaged in the Said City for about eight years. I am intimately acquainted with the fish trade and generally with all matters relating to the fisheries of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. & I was formerly of Gloucester in the State of Massachusetts, where I was connected with the fishery business aforesaid. 2nd. I say that it has for several years been the practice for the Col- 3274 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. onial fishermen, who have been engaged in the mackerel fishery along the shores of Prince Edward Island and Cape Breton to procure a por- tion of their bait for so fishing from United States Fishermen the said bait consisting of pogies or manhaden being brought from the United States by the fishermen of that Country. 3rd The boat fisheries of Colonial fishermen are prosecuted for the taking of Cod, haddock, hake, pollock, herrings, lobsters and mackeral. Of the fish so taken in boats by Colonial fishermen, the largest portion is codfish, as is shewn by the fact that the product of the Codfishery of Nova Scotia in 1876 amounted to Two Millions five hundred and forty nine thousand dollars while the other descriptions of fish taken in the same year, exclusive of mackeral, amounted to two millions three hun- dred and forty two thousand dollars more. The in-shore mackeral fish- ery of Nova Scotia amounted that year, as appears by the Report of the Canadian Fishery Commissioner, only to about seven hundred and fourteen thousand dollars constituting not more than about one eighth of the aggregate product of the inshore Colonial boat fishery of Nova Scotia. 4th Of the Makeral caught inshore, that is to say, within three miles of the shore in boats by the fishermen of this Province not more than one twentieth part of the aggregate catch is taken on that part of the Nova Scotia or Cape Breton Coast which is frequented by mackeral fishermen from the United States and which is that part of the coast lying on the Northern side of the Island of Cape Breton and stretching between the Strait of Canso and Sydney in said Island. 5th Cod and hallibut are caught by United States fishermen only in the deep sea or on the several off-shore fishing banks outside of the three Mile limit. 6th The Mackeral taken by United States Fishermen in-shore are caught only around the shores of the Magdalen Islands around the Shores of Prince Edward Island on the east coast of New Brunswick lying in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence and the North Coast of Cape Bre- ton extending from the Strait of Canso to Sydney. All other mackeral caught by United States fishermen off the Coasts of British North Amer- ica are taken outside of the three mile limit in the Gulf of Saint Law- I'êIl C62. 7th The inshore fisheries are prosecuted by United States fishermen on the Coasts of the British North American Provinces solely for Inack- eral and not in boats, but in vessels which only approach the shore to fish during the months of July August, September and October. At other seasons they prosecute the mackeral fishery in the deep sea fish- eries of the Gulf of Saint Lawrence outside of the three mile limit. 8th The whole mackeral catch by United States fishermen in British North American waters in the year 1876 I believe will not exceed in value thirty thousand dollars, the reason for the catch being so small was that for some years past the Mackeral fishery could be prosecuted more advantageously along the Coasts of the United States than on the coasts of British North America. Last year was one of the most profit- able and productive years on record for the mackeral fisheries on the United States Coast. 9th. The in-shore fisheries, that is to say: the fisheries within the three mile limit on the British North American Coast are only prose- cuted by United States fishermen for mackeral and in vessels, not in boats— 10th. The catch of Mackerel both inshore and offshore by Provincial fishermen constitutes only about one sixth of the aggregate catch of * AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3275 fish. Of the Mackerel caught by United States fishermen on the Brit- ish North American Coast not more than one fourth are caught inshore or within the three mile limit. The rest are caught outside the three mile limit. All other descriptions of fish caught by United States fish- ermen are caught on the banks and constitute the great bulk of the fish- €I'16"S. - The proportions which I have mentioned in this section of my affida- Vit are arrived at by taking an average of the results of fishing seasons through several years. But little injury if any in my opinion can result to Colonial fishermen from United States fishermen coming inshore to fish for mackeral. The large quantity of bait thrown from United States fishing vessels Attracts the fish in large numbers and enables the Colonial fishermen in boats to prosecute the fishery much more successfully than they could other- Wise do ; and experience has shewn that the free access of United States fishermen to the inshore fishery has not diminished the Colonial boat fisheries, but that such boat fisheries have been steadily increasing Since such free access was given and so far from its being found disad- Vantageous to fishermen to have a number of vessels fishing in Com- pany. It is quite usual and customary for large numbers of such ves- Sels to be engaged fishing for a length of time side by side and the practical result of such a mode of fishing is that the fish are attracted by the bait thrown in large quantities from the vessels as aforesaid and the fishing of Colonial fishermen in boats is greatly facilitated thereby. 11th Another advantage which Colonial fishermen derive from United States fishermen having access to the British North American fisheries, is by the former procuring bait from the latter as deposed to in the Second paragraph of this affidavit. A further advantage to the Colonial fishermen is that United States fishermen buy from the Colonial fisher- men herrings for bait to prosecute the Bank codfishery. The United States fishermen do not catch herring in British North American waters but buy such quantities as they require for bait for the Cod fishery from the Colonial fishermen. And another advantage accruing to the Prov- inces from the United States fishermen having access to the British North American fisheries arises from the fact that the United States fishermen purchase from traders in the Colonies supplies, not only of bait, but of ice, provisions, clothing, barrels salt, nets, twines and many Other articles. The purchases of bait and such other articles as are herein mentioned give employment to large numbers of persons and give a Very important trade to a number of settlements along the coast, Such as Prospect, Canso, Port Mulgrave and Louisburg. At Prospect alone about one thousand nets were set to catch herring for bait to be Sold to United States fishermen last season. Ice to the quantity of Seven hundred or eight hundred tons is usually bought there by the United States fishermen and in that place alone last season the purchases by the last named fishermen amounted from ten thousand dollars to fifteen thousand dollars. The procuring of bait on the coasts of the Colonies by the United States fishermen is quite as beneficial to the Colonists as to those fisher- men and the herring so supplied to them as bait is not used for mack- eral nor for any fishery inshore, but for the Bank fishery. During the last ten or fifteen years very few of the United States fishermen use salt bait they formerly brought salt bait with them and caught fresh fish, as they could for fresh bait, but now most of them procure their fresh 3276 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. bait from the Coast and keep it in the ice houses, with which most of their vessels are furnished. 12th. During the last few years the mackeral fishery in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence has been almost abandoned by Colonial and United States fishing vessels and is being almost entirely prosecuted in boats by Colonial fishermen. The fishery on the American Coast has been so much more productive of late years as to attract many of those, who formerly came to the Gulf; And the decline of that fishery in the Gulf being such as to cause many of the Colonial fishing vessels that formerly resorted there to be employed in other ways. At the time of the treaty the mackeral fishery along the British North American coast was considered valuable and important to the United States fishermen, but at the present time the deep sea fisheries and the fisheries on their own Coasts are principally relied on by them. 13th. A very large quantity of fresh fish, consisting of Salmon and halibut and in the winter of frozen herrings caught by Colonial fisher- men find a market in the United States probably from two hundred thousand to two hundred and fifty thousand dollars worth of fresh Sal- mon alone being exported annually from the British Provinces of North America to the United States. A large number of vessels load annually at Fortune Bay in the Island of Newfoundland with frozen herrings there caught by Colonial fishermen for the United States Market and employment is thereby given and benefits received by large numbers of Colonial fishermen who are engaged in that branch of the fisheries, which is the principal means of support of a large part of the local population during the winter season. At Grand Manaan and vicinity also large quantities of herring are caught by Colonial fishermen for the United States Market and these are largely shipped to the United States in Colonial-vessels, and the same statement herein deposed to, as re- gards the benefits accruing to the population at Fortune Bay applies to that at Grand Manaan. - Although previous to the Washington Treaty fresh fish as herein enumerated were admitted to the United States Markets free of duty, yet their admission was subject to changes in legislation from time to time instead of the Markets being permanently open as at present. 14th. The United States afford the only markets for mackerel of number one and number two grade all fat herring not consumed in the Dominion and of number one Salmon caught by Colonial fishermen. Such descriptions of fish find a market in the United States alone. 15th In this affidavit the statements which I have made in the pres- ent tense apply to the state of things which has existed for the last Seven years except where I have expressed a different meaning. * M. C. MORGAN. Sworn to before me at Halifax in the County of Halifax in the Prov- ince of Nova Scotia this 16th day of August A D 1877. (Seal.) W. D. HARRINGTON. J. P. NO. 205. I Richard Beazley of Halifax in the County of Halifax fisherman 'being solemnly sworn do make oath and say as follows: 1st I say that for forty years last past, I have been engaged in the fisheries of Nova Scotia, Labrador, Newfoundland Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Gulf of St Lawrence and Baie. des Chaleurs besides the deep sea fisheries as a fisherman and dealer in fish and have AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3277 been for that time intimately acquainted with the condition of the said fisheries and the manner in which fishing has been carried on by Colonial and United States fishermen. 2nd The same kinds and descriptions of fish that are found on the coasts and shores of the British North American Provinces are to be found on the coasts and shores of the United States which are now made available to Colonial fishermen by the Treaty of Washington and on the coasts, and shores of the United States several kinds of fish are procured which cannot be found on the coasts and shores of the British North American Provinces such as bass, porgies and other kinds, \ 3rd Nearly all the bait for mackeral used by Colonial fishermen is and must be procured by them from the United States fishermen who come to the coast of British North America under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington. The bait chiefly used for mackeral and the best bait are porgies which are all taken on the coast of the United States. and generally within three miles of the shore. It is a great benefit to Colonial fishermen to be able to procure such bait from the United States fishermen. - 4th The United States fishermen who come to the fisheries off the coast of British North America principally pursue the deep sea fisheries outside the three mile limit. About five sixths of the fish taken by United States fishermen off the British North American coast are taken Outside the three mile limit. 5th The fish taken inshore by United States fishermen is almost wholly mackerel and not more than one fourth of the mackerel taken by them in the vicinity of the British North American coast is taken inside the three mile limit while about three fourths, taking the average of seasons is procured outside the three mile limit, The fishery in British North American waters is not carried on in boats by the United States. fishermen but in vessels and when they are fishing inshore for mackeral it is principally around the shores of the Magdalen Islands and of Prince Edward Island and on the coast of New Brunswick, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and on the north coast of Cape Breton. The Colonial fisher- men fish principally in boats, 6th Colonial fishermen are benefitted and not injured in the prosecu- tion of the fisheries by United States fishermen being allowed to fish within the inshore limits. By such permission being given the Colonial fishermen are enabled to purchase their bait from the United States. fishermen which is a great, advantage to the former and besides that the throwing of bait by United States fishing vessels attracts the fish and enables the Colonial fishermen fishing in boats to fish much more suc- cessfully than they could otherwise do. For this reason it is quite com- mon for a large number of fishing vessels and boats to be seen engaged in fishing for a length of time side by side such a mode of fishing being found advantageous to all but especially to those who are fishing in boats. - - 7th. The cost of fishing vessels and of the outfits for the same in the Brit- ish Provinces is at least twenty-five per cent lower than the cost thereof in the United States and as a consequence of this difference in prices a large number of United States fishing vessels procure their Outfits in the British North American Provinces. 8th The United States fishermen use herring almost entirely for bait in the codfishery which they prosecute on the Banks and in the deep. sea fishery outside the three mile limit and they procure almost all the herring and other bait which they use for that purpose from Colonial 3278 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. fishermen. In addition to bait the United States fishermen purchase from the people of the British Provinces large quantities of ice, salt, barrels, provisions, clothing, nets, twines, and other articles used in the prosecution of the fisheries. The trade with the United States fisher- men for such articles is of great benefit to the people of the British Provinces and is the principal trade of some of the ports of Nova Sco- tia. Large quantities of fresh fish are also purchased by Americans in some parts of the British Provinces for shipment to the United States and such shipments are mostly made in Colonial vessels. 9th Of late years the drying and curing of fish by the United States fishermen is principally done on the decks of their vessels and they sel- dom land to dry nets or to cure fish or to repack them or to transship Cargoes. - 10th The Treaty of Washington so far as the privileges of the fisheries are concerned is I verily believe as beneficial to the people of the British Provinces as to the people of the United States, both will be equally benefitted by its provisions being carried out. 11th For all number one and number two mackerel, for all fat her- ring not consumed at home and for all number one salmon from the British Provinces the United States afford the only market and the duties paid on the exportation of such fish from the British Provinces before the Treaty of Washington amounted to a very large sum of money annually and the opening of the United States markets by said Treaty to such exportations has been a very great benefit to the people of the British Provinces. 12th For several years past the inshore fisheries of the British Prov- inces have not been so much resorted to by United States fishermen as they were formerly and they are being less and less resorted to every year by such fishermen, one reason for this fact is the change in the modes of fishing pursued by such fishermen and another is the fact that the mackerel fishery on the coasts of the British Provinces has for sev- eral years past been declining While it has been improving during the same period on the coasts of the United States. 13th The fisheries on the coasts of the United States would be very nearly as valuable to Colonial fishermen as to the United States fisher- men if the former chose to avail themselves of the concession of the Washington Treaty in that particular, and latterly they are beginning to avail themselves of that fishery which is annually becoming more valuable. - 14th In this affidavit the statements which I have made in the pres- ent tense apply to the state of things which has existed for the past six years except where I have expressed a different meaning. - RICHARD BEAZLEY Sworn to before me at Halifax in the County of Halifax this Thirteenth day of June A D 1877 (Seal.) - WM MCEQERRON” Notary Public NO. 206. I John Glazebrook of Halifax in the County of Halifax in the Prov- ince of Nova Scotia Fisherman being Solemnly sworn do make oath and Say as follows: * - 1st I say that for forty five years last past I have been engaged in the fisheries of British North America and have been for that time inti- mately acquainted with the condition of the said fisheries and the man- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3279 ner in which fishing has been carried on by the Colonial and United States fishermen. 2nd The same kinds and descriptions of fish that are found in the fisheries mentioned in the last paragraph are to be found on the coasts and shores of the United States which are now thrown open to Colonial fishermen by the Treaty of Washington and also several other kinds such as Bass and pogies which are not to be found on the coasts and shores of British North America. 3rd The greater part of the bait used by Colonial fishermen in the mackeral fishery is procured from the United States and is furnished to said fishermen by United States fishermen who come to the coasts of the Provinces under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington. The best and most commonly used bait for mackerel are pogies which are taken from the coasts of the United States and generally inshore and the pro- curing of such bait is a great benefit to Colonial fishermen. 4th Much the larger proportion of the fisheries pursued by United States fishermen off the Atlantic Coast of British North America con- sists of the deep sea fisheries outside of the three mile limit. I believe that at least three fourths if not five sixths of the fish taken by United States fishermen off the shores of the British Provinces are taken out- side the three mile limit. 5th The United States fishermen pursue the inshore fisheries almost solely for mackerel and of the mackerel taken by such fishermen on the coasts of British North America much the smaller part—in fact only about one fourth is taken inside while about three fourths are taken outside the three mile limit taking the average of seasons. The United States fishermen do not fish in boats when in British North American waters but in vessels. The Colonial fishermen fish principally in boats. The United States fishermen procure the mackerel which they catch in shore chiefly around the shores of the Magdalen Islands around the shores of Prince Edward Island—on the east coast of New Brunswick in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence and on the north coast of Cape Breton. 6th Colonial fishermen are benefitted and not injured in the prosecu- tion of the fisheries by the United States fishermen being allowed to fish within the inshore limit—they are benefitted by being enabled to purchase bait as before mentioned and are enabled to take larger quan- tities of fish than they could do if fishing alone by reason of the fish being attracted by the quantities of bait thrown from the United States fishing vessels. 7th The cost of fishing vessels and of outfits therefor in the British Provinces is at least twenty five per cent lower than the cost thereof in the United States and as a consequence of this difference in prices a large number of United States fishing vessels procure their outfits in the British Provinces yearly. 8th The United States fishermen procure the herring which is almost the Only bait, which they use for the deep sea codfishery by purchase from Colonial fishermen—they make such purchases in large quantities buying all or nearly all the bait they need for that fishery from Colonial fishermen and they buy in addition from the inhabitants along the coasts of the British Provinces large quantities of ice salt barrels pro- Visions nets twines cables clothing and all other articles used in the prosecution of the fisheries. This is the principal trade of some of the ports of Nova Scotia and is a great benefit to the inhabitants. Large Quantities of fresh fish are also purchased by Americans in some parts Of the British Provinces for shipment to the United States and such Shipments are chiefly made in Colonial vessels. 328() AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 9th Of late years the drying and curing of fish by United States fish- ermen is principally done on the decks of their vessels and they seldom land to dry nets or to cure fish or to repack them or to trans-ship cargoes. 10th The Treaty of Washington so, far as the privileges of the fish- ermen are concerned is I verily believe as beneficial to the people of the British Provinces as to the people of the United States. 11th The United States afford the only market for all number one and number two mackerel for all fat herring not consumed at home and for all number one salmon from the British Provinces and the duties paid on the exportation of such fish from the British Provinces before the Treaty of Washington amounted to a very large sum of money annually. The provisions of the Treaty of Washington by which said market is made free are a very great benefit to the people of the British Provinces. 12th For several years past the inshore fisheries of the British Prov- inces have not been so much resorted to by United States fishermen as they were formerly and they are being less and less resorted to every year by such fishermen. The change in the mode of fishing pursued by. such fishermen is one reason for this circumstance and another reason is that the mackerel fishery on the coasts of British North America has for several years past been declining while it has been improving during the same period on the coasts of the United States. The fisheries on the coasts of the United States would be as valuable to Colonial fisher- men as to the United States fishermen if the former chose to avail them- selves of the concessions of the Treaty of Washington in that particular. 13th In this affidavit the statements which I have made in the present tense apply to the State of things existing for the last six or seven years except where I have expressed a different meaning. / his JoBN + GLAZEBROOK mark Sworn to before me at Halifax in the Province of Nova Scotia this 20th day of June A D 1877 being first read and explained to deponent. (Seal.) WM MGKERRON Notary Public. No. 207. I William Hays of Halifax in the County Halifax fisherman being solemnly sworn do make oath and say as follows: 1st I say that for forty years last past I have been engaged in the fish- eries of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland, and have been for that time intimately acquainted with the condition of the said fisheries and the manner in which fishing has been carried on by the Colonial and United States fishermen. 2nd The same kinds and descriptions of fish that are found on the Coasts and shores of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island are to be found on the coasts and shores of the United States which are now made available to Colonial fishermen by the Treaty of Washington, and on the coasts and shores of the United States several descriptions of fish are procured which cannot be found on the coasts and shores of Nova 'Scotia and Prince Edward Island, natuely, Bass, porgies, and other kinds, - 3rd The greater part of the bait used by Colonial fishermen in the mackeral fishery is and must be procured from the United States and is furnished to them by United States fishermen who come to the coasts of the Provinces under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, The best and most commonly used bait for mackeral are porgies which AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3281 are all taken from the coasts of the United States and generally inshore, and the procuring of such bait in this way is a great benefit to the Colo- nial fishermen. - * 4th Of the fisheries pursued by United States fishermen off the Atlan- tic coast of British North America much the larger proportion consists of the deep sea fisheries outside the three mile limit. I believe that at least three fourths if not five sixths of the fish taken by United States fishermen off the said coast last mentioned are taken outside the three mile limit, 5th The United States fishermen pursue the inshore fisheries chiefly for mackeral and of the mackeral taken by such fishermen on the Coasts of British North America about one fourth is taken inside and about three fourths outside the three mile limit, taking the average of seasons. The United States fishermen do not fish in boats when in British North American waters but in vessels, the Colonial fishermen fish principally in boats, The United States fishermen procure the mackeral which they catch inshore principally around the shores of the Magdalen Isl- ands, around the shores of Prince Edward Island, the East coast of New Brunswick and the North coasts of Cape Breton. - , 6th Colonial fishermen are not injured in the prosecution of the fish- eries but benefitted by the United States fishermen being allowed to fish Within the inshore limits, the facility thus given for the purchase of bait is a great advantage to Colonial fishermen and in consequence of the large quantities of bait thrown from a fleet of United States fishing ves- sels the Colonial fishermen fishing in the vicinity of such a fleet are en- . to take much larger quantities of fish than they could if fishing a10ne,— 7th The cost of fishing vessels and of the outfits for the same in the British Provinces is at least twenty five per cent lower than the cost thereof in the United States and as a consequence of this difference in prices a large number of United States fishing vessels procure their out- fits in the British North American Provinces 8th The United States fishermen procure the bait which they use for the deep sea codfishery which bait consists of herring by purchasing the the same from Colonial fishermen, they purchase herring for such pur- pose in large quantities and in fact obtain all or nearly all they need in that Way from Colonial fishermen and in addition to their purchases of bait the United States fishermen purchase from traders along the coasts of the British Provinces large quantities of ice, salt, barrels, provisions, nets, twines, clothing and all other articles used in the prosecution of the fisheries. The trade with the United States fishermen for such articles is of great benefit to the people of the British Provinces and is the principal trade of some of the ports of Nova Scotia, Large quan- tities of fresh fish are also purchased by Americans in some parts of the British Provinces for shipment to the United States and such shipments are mostly made in Colonial vessels. 9th Of late years the drying and curing of fish by United States fishermen is principally done on the decks of their vessels and they sel- dom land to dry nets or to cure fish or to repack them or to trans-ship Cargoes, 10th The Treaty of Washington so far as the priviliges of the fisheries are concerned is, I verily believe as beneficial to the people of the Brit- ish Provinces as to the people of the United States, both will be equally benefitted by such privileges being given. 11th For all number one and number two mackeral for all fat herring not consumed at home and for all number one Salmon from the British 206 F. - 3282 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Provinces the United States afford the only market and the duties paid on the exportation of such fish from the British Provinces before the Treaty of Washington amounted to a very large sum of money annually, and the opening of the United States Market by the Treaty of Washington to such exportation has been a very great benefit to the people of the British Provinces, - 12th For several years past the inshore fisheries of the British Prov- inces have not been so much resorted to by United States fishermen a they were formerly and they are being less and less resorted to every year by such fishermen—one reason for this fact is the change' in the modes of fishing pursued by such fishermen, Another is the fact that the mackerel fishery on the coasts of the British Provinces has for several years past been declining while it has been improving during the same period on the coasts of the United States . 13th The fisheries on the coast of the United States would be as valuable to Colonial fishermen as to the United States fishermen if the Colonial fishermen chose to avail themselves of the concessions of the Washington Treaty in that particular and latterly they are beginning to avail themselves of that fishery which is annually becoming more Valuable. 14th In this affidavit the statements which I have made in the present tense apply to the State of things which has existed for the past six years except where I have expressed a different meaning. WILLIAM HAYES Sworn to before me at Halifax in the County of Halifax in the Prov- ince of Nova Scotia this 13th day of June A D 1877 - WM MCRERRON (Seal.) Notary Public No. 208. The Eaſamination of Captain William A. Molloy of Great St. Lawrence Mewfoundland taken before George Henry Emerson. Attorney at Law. JEaCaſminer * …' The said witness being Sworn Saith—I am a native of Newfoundland and am 27 years of age. I have been engaged in the Fishery-business all my life. There is very little inshore-fishing done by American Fish- erman within three miles of the Coast of Newfoundland except bait- taking. There is no mackerel-fishing done on the Coast of Newfound- land by either American or British fisherman. There is no boat-fishing done on the inshore by American fisherman I was eight years fishing out of Gloucester six years of which I was Master—I am therefore per- fectly acquainted with the American fishing in the Maratime Provinces. I have never known the American Fisherman avail themselves of the privilege of landing to dry nets, cure fish or use the shore for any other purpose in this Colony except for obtaining Water The fisherman of Newfoundland benefit very materially by intercourse with American fisherman both by traffic in bait, ice and fishing-stores and the selling by American-fisherman within the Colony, of their small fish and oil. I think that the importance of the intercourse of American fisherman with British fisherman cannot at present be estimated. Every Ameri- can Fishing vessel that comes to Newfoundland cannot get out under an outlay of from sixty to seventy dollars for bait and ice. The British fisheries for the past few years have been less productive and remunera- tive to those engaged in them, than formerly. The shore fisheries on AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3283 the inshore have been of very little value to those prosecuting them either from the States or Newfoundland for the past four years. The fishing by American fisherman in the Waters of the Provinces does not lessen the catch of American or British fisherman; and the presence of American Fishermen in the Provincial Waters improves the Status of the Provincial fisherman, who are much inferior to the American fisherman, and are at least a century behind the age in the manner of Catching fish. If the British fishermen employed as much capital and had as much energy and enterprise as the American Fisherman I believe that the American Fishermen cannot compete on the Newfoundland coast in catching fish. The only advantage derived by American Fish- erman from the Treaty of Washington 1871, is the advantage of catch- ing bait and obtaining ice which is also of great advantage to New- foundlanders in the way of Traffic. WILLIAM MOLLOY Taken before me at Saint Johns Newfoundland this 1st day of June A D 1877 GEO H.Y EMERSON JR Iºasaminer— NO. 209. The examination of Levi Griffin of Boston United States of America but at present of Saint John's Newfoundland taken before me George Henry JEmerson Jr. Eacaminer— This Witness being sworn, saith :— I am a native of the State of Maine but at present am fishing in New- foundland I am thirty four years of age, and have been engaged in the fishery-business about twenty years. The American fisherman do not use and have never used the inshore fisheries for cod fishing. There is no mackercl fishing on the Coast of Newfoundland. There is no boat- fishing done by Americans on the Coast of Newfoundland Even the Bank fishing has become less lucrative and important within the past ten years than it formerly was. To my knowledge there has been no use made by the Americans of the privilege of landing on the Coast of Newfoundland for curing the fish, drying the nets, obtaining their wood. There is no object whatever to be obtained by such landing. American fisherman generally purchase whatever they require from the people of the Island. The value to all provincial fisherman especially to Newfoundlanders cannot be too highly estimated (and will no doubt be of greater value in the future) of their intercourse with Americans. IEvery Fishing vessel that enters the ports of Newfoundland, belonging to Americans leaves at least Eighty dollars. Nearly all the American fisherman purchase ice, bait and stores and supplies in large quantities in Newfoundland and this trade is increasing very largely every year. I have repeatedly heard the fisherman of Newfoundland assert that it was a great benefit to them to have constant intercourse with Americans Thousands of Barrels of bait would pass the shores of Newfoundland every year if the Americans did not come down to purchase them. This trade with the fisherman of Newfoundland for bait and ice is of great benefit to the Island and generally recognized to be so except by the large Merchants of the Island. A great impetus has been given to the fishing-business in Newfoundland since the passing of the Washington Treaty 1871. The trade of Americans with Newfoundlanders has in- creased at least One hundred per cent. per annum, since the passing of the Treaty and is steadily increasing with great advantage to all con- 3284. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Cerned. It is the real opinion of the Inhabitants of the Maratime Prov- inces especially Newfoundland that the incidental advantages to be derived from the presence of American fisherman in British Waters is is of great value to British Fisherman is very great, and that the fisheries on the Coast of Newfoundland do not suffer to any extent. and does not lessen in any Way the catch of British fisherman. If the British fisher- man employed as much capital and had as much energy and enterprise as American fisherman the American Waters would be of more impor- tance to Newfoundlanders than the British Waters are to Americans especially as there are no mackerel to be caught on the Newfoundland COaSt. * The fishing-business as a rule does not make very large returns com- pared with other businesses, considering the Amount of Capital and time employed in its prosecution. It is a very precarious means of liv- ing—and the “fisherman's luck” is almost as proverbial as the “Miners luck.” IEWI GRIFFIN Taken before me at Saint John's this 2nd day of July A D 1877 GEO. H.Y. EMERSON J.R. Easaminer— NO. 210. The easamination of Henry A. Cobb a native Province Town Massa ; but at present of Saint John's Newfoundland taken before me George Henry IEmerson, Elacaſminer. This witness being sworn saith: My name is Henry A. Cobb. I am 26 years of age and have been engaged in the cod and other fisheries all my life. I have been fishing on the Grand Bank for a period of ten years. It is not true that American Fishermen use the inshore fishery within three miles for cod-fishing. There are no mackerel on the Coast of Newfoundland. There is not any boat-fishing done by American fisher- men on the inshore fisheries except bait-taking, which is seldom done, as American Fishermen are rarely equipped for bait-catching of any kind, and are consequently driven to purchase from the Newfoundland. The inshore fishing is of no value to American fisherman and has to my Rnowledge been of very little value to British-fishermen for the past ten years I have never known, in all my experience, extending over ten years of American fisherman availing themselves of the privilege of landing on the Coast of Newfoundland to dry nets, cure fish or for any other purpose. Since the Treaty of Washington the number of American fishing-vessels has not increased on the coast of Newfound- land and the only advantage derived by American fisherman is the privilege of obtaining fresh-bait from Newfoundland fishermen. The advantage derived from intercourse with American fisherman, is very great to Newfoundlanders. American fishing vessels call at the differ- ent ports on the South East and West of Newfoundland and buy bait, ice, and fishing stores to large amounts and sell their small-fish and oil. Every fishing vessel entering a Newfoundland port expends at least Seventy five dollars every trip before she leaves. This is of great ad- Vantage to the Newfoundland people especially in the outports where the fisherman is generally very poor and very destitute. It is true that the British fisheries are much less productive and less valuable than they formerly were and the inshore fishery's on the coast of Newfound- land has been reduced about fifty per cent. in quantity and value within AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3285 the past ten years. It is the opinion of most maritime provincial fish- ermen that the incidental advantages derived by them from intercourse with American fishermen are very great ; and that the presence of American fisherman in British Waters is not detrimental to the interests of British fishermen, either by depreciating the value of the fish by competition, or decreasing the Catch of fish in the provinces. If the British fishermen were more energetic and put more capital into their fisheries and had the same class of vessels prosecuting the fishery that the Americans have, the Mackerel fishing of the United States would be of inestimable value to them as they have no mackerel fishing in Newfoundland. 4; I do not think there has been any advantage obtained by American fishermen by the Treaty of Washington except taking bait. The only Mackerel fishing that the Americans prosecuted in British Waters before the passing of the Treaty was at Bay Chaleur, and that has failed from natural causes. EHENRY A. COBB. Taken before me at Saint Johns Newfoundland this 2nd day of June A D 1877. s GEO. H.Y EMERSON JR, JEla'aminer No. 211. The evamination of Cyrenius Brown of Trepassey in the Island of Newfound land (formerly of the State of Maine U. S.) taken before me at Saint John's Newfoundland, This Witness being sworn saith : — I am a native of Bucksport in the State of Maine United States of America but at present residing in Trepassey in the Island of Newfound. land. I am sixty nine years of age. I have been engaged in the Fishery business about forty years. It is not true that American fisherman use the inshore fisheries within three miles of the Coast of Newfoundland for cod or other fishing. American fisherman fish either on the Grand Bank, St. Peters Bank or Banquero. There is no mackerel on the Coast of Newfoundland. The inshore fishery is of little or no value to Amer- ican fisherman. It is never prosecuted by American fishermen. I never Rnew American fishermen to land on the coast of Newfoundland for the purpose of drying their nets curing their fish. This privilege is never availed of by American fishermen because they bring their fish to the States in a “green” condition, which is more profitable than drying and curing in Newfoundland, where the weather is much less suited for the cure of fish than the climate of the United States. I think the value of American “Bankers” visiting Newfoundland is of great value to Newfoundlands. The American “Bankers” purchase large quantities of Bait and ice in Newfoundland. This practice of vis- iting Newfoundland for the purpose of obtaining Bait, which was hardly known ten years ago, is increasing rapidly and will be of more Value to Newfoundlanders in the future. This practice increases about twenty per. cent, every year. Each American “Banker” spends about sixty to Seventy dollars for Bait on her visit to Newfoundland. This Traffic is of great value to Newfoundland; and the people of the country think it. a great blessing to be able to sell the Bait to the Americans, which would otherwise be useless and unprofitable to any one. Newfoundlanders. generally acknowledge that they receive a great deal more by free inter- 3286 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. course with Americans in their fishery business than they do with either Canadian or Nova Scotian fisherman. 38 CYRENIUS BROWN Taken before me at Saint Johns Newfoundland this 2nd day of July 1877. GEO. H.Y. EMERSON JR JEla'aminer NO, 212. The Easamination of William Fitzgerald of St John's Newfoundland taken - before me George Henry Emerson Ela'aminer. This witness being sworn saith :—I am thirty nine years of age. I have been engaged in the Fishery-business over twenty years. I have been fishing out of the Port of Gloucester, United States, for the past ten years. I am well acquainted with the American fishing on the Coast of Newfoundland The Americans never did not do they now use the inshore-fishery within three miles for the purposes of cod or any other fishing except the taking of bait There is not any mackerel fish- ing on the coast of Newfoundland by either American of British Fisher- men. There is no boat fishing by the Americans on the Coast of New- foundland at all. American fishermen do not come prepared for inshore fishing. Inshore fishing would not be profitable to Americans as the inshore fish would not find a market in the United States owing to the smallness of the fish. Americans do not make use in any way of the privilege granted under the Treaty of Washington of landing on the coast of Newfoundland to cure fish, dry nets or procure wood and water. Americans buy their wood and water from the Newfoundlanders. The only advantage derived by Americans under the Above Treaty is the privilege of procuring fresh-bait and ice which they always, with few exceptions, purchase in the different ports of Newfoundland. I think that the presence of American fishermen in the ports of Newfoundland purchasing stores bait ice &c is of great advantage to the people of the Colony and is of great value to the fishermen of the provinces in the way of increased traffic and will be of more importance to the people in the future. I paid last year fifty cents per hundred to Newfoundlanders for Squids for bait and I purchased about 15,000 at that price. I con- . sider that number of Squids small for a vessel to take. I have paid as high as ninety cents per hundred for squids on the Western Coast of Newfoundland. f - - I think great advantages will be obtained by Newfoundland in the future by the intercourse of American fishermen with Newfoundland fishermen, quite as much as the benefits derived by American fishermen by privileges granted under the Washington Treaty. The Mutual inter- Course Will improve the habits and customs of the Newfoundland fisher- men especially in the manner of taking and curing fish and also in giv- ing labour to Newfoundland fishermen ; which they are not at all times able to obtain. Half the population of Newfoundland are thrown out of employment when the inshore fishery fails. f his ~. 9 WILLIAM + FITZGERALD mark & Taken before me at Saint Johns this 5th day of June A D 1877– GEO EI. Y EMERSON JR, AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3287 No. 213. I, Charles H. Nute Master of Sch. Edward E. Webster of Gloucester and formerly Master of Sch's Ben Perley Poore, Lightfoot, Ontario & C. B. Manning—all of Gloucester, was born in Gloucester, am 32 years of age & have been engaged in the fisheries for 20 years & continuously engaged in the Grand Bank fishery for the past twelve (12) years taking Cod & Halibut for the first nine years obtained my bait upon the Banks —usually carrying from home a few barrels of Pogie Slivers to procure the first fish & afterwards fishes-peas & other refuse parts of fish, also useing Bird-meat,-a large quantity being obtained by catching the Elagdon with a hook—for the last three years I have bought my bait of the inhabitants of Newfoundland paying cash for the same. the holding of bait by traps and pounds by the people of N. F. enables us to obtain our bait readily & is a source of income to them and convenience to us —the people will often chase us for miles for an opportunity to bait an American fisherman,—we meet their boats off St. Peters seeking for American vessels to sell them bait, there being a very active competi- tion in selling bait and supplies the Newfoundlanders carry this bait to St Peters to sell to the French vessels & we could easily procure this bait there, as there are thousands of barrels annually thrown overboard for want of a market & the only object in going to Newfoundland is to obtain the bait in its freshest state—I never have caught any bait at N. F. but have purchased it when I have got any at N. F.—I have never known any American vessel to catch bait at Newfoundland having uni- formly purchased the same. I paid on this last voyage, ending Aug 10, 1877, $271 to the inhabit- ants of N. F. for bait - I know that this trade is of great advantage to the inhabitants of Newfoundland, as our vessels leave from one to two thousand dollars Some days, in some of the little Coves of the Coast—the Squid are entirely useless except for the purposes of bait, and the American and Erench fleet provide the only market—there is about 250 American ves- Sels engaged in the Bank fishery—a portion—say one half—purchase bait at Newfoundland I have never caught any Halibut or Cod within one hundred & fifty miles of the British shores the american Cod & Halibut fishery being entirely a deep-sea or ocean fishery and I knew of no American vessels taking Cod or Halibut within three miles of the shore—there is no American vessel engaged in the Codfishery that car- ries Seines or nets to procure bait - - CEHARLES EI NUTE COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ESSEX SS. August 13th 1877 Then personally appeared the above named Charles H. Nute and made Oath that all the above statements by him subscribed are true to the best of his knowledge & belief before me - (Seal.) - DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 214. T, Joseph Oakley, Master of the Schooner Sarah P. Ayer of Glouces- ter do depose and say that I was born in Nova Scotia, am 29 years of age, have been continuously engaged in the fisheries—the last eight years of which being out of Gloucester & always to the Grand Banks. 3288 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. I have read the statement of Captain Charles H. Nute of Sch Edward B. Webster, and in all its features and statements it accords with my own experience & is perfectly true—on my last trip to Grand Bank I took my bait at Newfoundland and paid $209,76 cash for the same— have never caught fish or halibut while in an American vessel within 3 miles of the shore—the American Cod & halibut fishery is entirely a deep-sea or ocean fishery. I consider the bait business of Newfound- land of vastly more profit to the inhabitants than convenience or profit to the Americans and I believe that were it not for this trade of bait & supplies to the American fleet; the inhabitants would suffer great dis- tress & poverty. as their stock in trade would be entirely useless, were it not for our fleet to purchase them, - **. - JOSEPH OAKLEY COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS BSSEX SS. g GLOUCESTER Aug. 13th 1877. Then personally appeared the above named Joseph Oakley and made oath that all the above statements by him subscribed are true to the best of his knowledge and belief before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW - Notary Public I, Mathew McDonald Master of the Sch Clara B. Chapman, and sub- sequently of the Sch. Webster Sanborn was born in Prince Edward Island am twenty six years of age, have been engaged in the fisheries from Gloucester for the past eight years — principally on the Grand IBanks, taking Codfish & halibut. I have used for bait principally her- ring & squid in all cases purchasing the same of the inhabitants of New- foundland & paying Cash for the same at the rate of $2. per Bbl. for Berring and 50 Cts per 100 for Squid — the people there being anxious to sell the same to the American fishermen — I have never attempted to catch any bait on the Coast of N. F. — am well acquainted with the manner in which bait is obtained by the American fishermen & I know that all with which I am acquainted buy their bait — paying cash for the same, -have never known of but one casein which the bait was caught — one vessel taking a few Bbls of Squid at Conception Bay, N. F. I have never fished for, Cod or Halibut on the British shores, nor do I know of any American vessel ever taking these fish within the limit of three miles from the shore, the Cod & Halibut fisheries, as prosecuted by the American fishermen, is entirely a deep-sea fishery. MATHEW MCDONALD STATE OF MASSACHUSETS }ss COUNTY OF ESSEX & GLOUCESTER Aug 13th 1877. Then personally appeared the within named Mathew McDonald, Mas- ter of Sch. Clara B. Chapman, and made oath that the Within statement by him subscribed is true - / - IBefore me - (Seal.). DAVID W. LOW Notary Public AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3289. No. 216. The Eaſamination of Patrick Walsh of St. John's Newfoundland taken before me George Henry Emerson jr Eaſaminer— This witness being sworn saith— I am forty three years of age and have been engaged in the Fishery since I was fourteen years old. I am Master of a Newfoundland Steam Bait Skiff, a vessel belonging to the Honorable Ambrose Shea of St John's Newfoundland, and used by him for procuring bait for the Fish- ermen of Newfoundland. I never knew the American fishermen use the inshore shore fishery for Cod or other fishing. We have no mackerel on the Coast of this Island. The American fisherman frequent our Harbors for the purpose of procuring bait to prosecute the fishery on the Banks of Newfoundland. They purchase always and do not catch it themselves. The fishermen of Newfoundland benefit by this traffic with the American fishermen in bait and ice. The Newfoundland fishermen can procure plenty of bait when it is impossible to catch fish, which bait the Americans purchase from him at the rate of 40 to 50 cents per hundred. This is of inestima- ble value to Newfoundlanders as the inshore fishery on this Coast for the past ten years has been very unproductive while there has been a great quantity of bait, which if it were not for the purchase by the American fishermen would be perfectly useless to any one. his PATRICK X WALSH. mark. Taken before me at Saint Johns Newfoundland this 4th day of June A. D 1877 GEO. H. Y EMERSON J.R. No. 217. Eacamination of Captain James Brown of Boston, Mass : at present of Saint John's taken before me George Henry Emerson, Ealaminer. This witness being sworn saith :— I am thirty two years of age and have been engaged in the Bank fishery on the Coast of Newfoundland for the past fifteen years. The American fisherman do not use the inshore fisheries within three miles of the Coast of Newfoundland for either Cod or other fishing, except for taking bait. American fishermen always buy their bait on the coast of Newfoundland from the Newfoundland fishermen. The is no mack- erel fishing on the Coast of Newfoundland. There is no boat-fishing by the Americans on the Coast of Newfoundland. I have never known American fishermen land on the Coast of Newfoundland to dry nets, cure fish or for any other purpose. There is no necessity of American, Fishermen landing in Newfoundland except for the purpose of purchasing bait, Ice, and fishing stores. American fishermen always purchase bait. They never catch their own bait. The Americans never come prepared, and find it cheaper to purchase bait, than to bring nets and gear from the States, to catch it with, An American fishing vessel would want about fifty barrels of Herring for bait, or about twenty thousand squids. IIerring average about forty dollars for fifty barrels of Herring, and about forty cents per Hundred for squids — I think that the traffic between the American fisherman and the Newfoundland fisherman is of 3290 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. * great importance to the Newfoundlander, in putting into circulation among the people of the Western Coast a great deal of money and the facility of obtaining by the Newfoundlander from the Americans pro- visions at a cheaper rate than can be obtained from the Newfoundland Merchant, whose prices are exceedingly high. The intercourse of American and Newfoundland fisherman is also of great importance in improving the manners and habits of the Newfoundlander especially in the manner of catching fish and in improving generally the status of the Newfoundland fisherman who is at least half a centuary behind the age even in obtaining and curing fish which is his only means of Sup- port. I think the American fishermen leave about sixty thousand dol- lars a years in Newfoundland and all this money is spent among the fishermen and not among the merchants. This must be of inestimable Value to the people of Newfoundland who are a very people and have Very little money among them — JAMES BROWN Taken before me at Saint Johns aforesaid this 4th day of June A D 1877 — GEO. H. Y EMERSON JR, JEacaminer No. 218. I. John H. McKinnon a native of Cape Breton N. S. aged 28 years Master of Schooner Rutherford B. Hayes of Gloucester, Mass. on oath deposes and says that in 1875 he was Master of Schooner Mary Low of Gloucester Mass. and was engaged in the Grand Bank Fishing for Cod and Halibut, catching them with Trawls baited mostly with Herring purchased in Hermitage Bay Newfoundland, that I have never caught any bait myself but they the Newfoundlanders have asked my Crew to help them catch the bait, but I did not get it any cheaper on that account. My experience has been that no American Wessel has caught their own bait but occasionally as a favor or to get their bait Quicker have aided the Newfoundland fishermen in catching it. paying in full for it. American fishermen do not carry Nets or anything to take bait with, except a few Squid jigs—I never took any Codfish or EHalibut Within three miles of the coast of Newfoundland or British Provinces While I have been in an American Vessel. and do not believe an Ameri- can Vessel does it, except to get a fresh fish to eat. All their Cod & Eſalibut Fisheries are deep Sea fisheries. I have purchased Ice in New- foundland for which nearly double was paid for it more than Ice sold for in Gloucester. All the supplies wanted for Vessel use is a great deal higher in Newfoundland and the Inhabitants are making money from their trade with American Vessels—In selling to American Wessels I consider it is worth much more to them than the privilege of buying is, to us, as the markets of the French Islands are open to us. and the bait would seek that Market were the Ports of Newfoundland closed to American Fishermen, and I think it is made a market for their bait now, to considerable extent. f I have been engaged in the Cod & Halibut fisheries for the past five years having been four years Skipper or Master. - JOEIN MCEQINNON STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS } SS COUNTY OF ESSEX GLOUCESTER Aug. 13th, 1877 Then personally appeared the above named John McKinnon and sub- Scribed and made oath that the foregoing statement is true. Before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3291 NO. 219. I. John Curzon a native of Pictou Nova Scotia. Master of Schooner Mist of Gloucester Massachusetts Aged 35 years on oath depose and Say that I have been engaged in the fishing business, nine years, Cod & Halibut Fishing wholly, with exception of one trip after Mackerel, have fished on Grand Bank. and Georges Banks. In fishing on the Grand Banks I have bought my bait. paying cash have procured them in For- tune, Tar and Conception Bays in Newfoundland, paying from 200 to 75c per hundred for Squid and from $25 to $30 for baiting our Schooner for the voyage. I have purchased Ship Stores and Ice in Newfoundland always paying more than I could have bought for at home, they asking the highest prices for everything—I have never carried Nets or anything to catch bait and know of no vessel (American) that has. the trade with American vessels has been for three or four years past and they make money out of it I do not know what they would do without us for their Squid would be worthless without our trade. and their Herring would be almost wortless to them except what few they could sell at the French Islands. If prevented from purchasing bait and supplies in Newfound- land, American fishermen could go to the French Islands and get plenty, and their other supplies much cheaper. That I consider that their chance to sell to American Fishermen is worth a great deal more to them than our privilege to go there and pur- chase. for dozzens are running after you to sell bait and if they think you want supplies and ice the Merchants or Traders solicit your trade. JOEIN CURZON COMMON WEALTEL OF MASSAOEIUSETTS ESSEX SS. GLOUCESTER Aug 13th 1877 Then personally appeared John Curzon, above named, and made oath that all the above statements by him subscribed are true. before me IDAVID W. LOW (Seal.) <º Notary Public No. 220. I, John G. Dennis of Gloucester in the county of Essex and Com- monwealth of Massachusetts, being duly sworn do depose and say that I am forty years old, and have been engaged in the fishing business both as fishermen and in sending out vessels. for the last fifteen years I am now a member of the firm of Dennis and Ayer. I send on an ave- rage two vessels each winter to Fortune Bay Newfoundland for herring— Herring are purchased from the inhabitants of Newfoundland and are never caught by the Americans—The vessels that go to Newfoundland for herring are not prepared for fishing they purchase herring paying from one to two dollars per barrel partly in money and partly in goods, provisions, &c these vessels all make entry at the Custom-EHouse and pay duties upon the goods with which they purchase the herring— American vessels leave from ($25000,00) twenty-five thousand dollars to ($40,000 00) forty thousand dollars Each year in the region of For- tune Bay—This is the only business the inhabitants of Fortune Bay have during the winter, and the only market for their herring and with- Out it they would not be able to live—American vessels have never been ordered off or forbidden to purchase herring on the coast of New foundland— I am also engaged in the cod. fishery on the Grand Banks and my ves- 3292 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. sels purchase bait on the Coast of Newfoundland herring is the bait principally used, my vessels bring some bait from the United States but when they are out of it they call at the various bays of Newfound- land and purchase it there, No objection has ever been made to pur- chasing bait and supples on the Newfoundland coast, the inhabitants are glad enough to sell it to us as it is a very profitable trade for them— The Newfoundland traders in bait and ice advertise in the Gloucester newspapers and send circulars to the various fishing firms asking their custom—Bait is also purchased at the French Islands from the New- foundland jacks which come there to sell the herring bait to the French and American fishing vessels—I consider the herring fishery of New- foundland of no value to Americans, they never catch but only purchase the fish and pay the full value for them—American vessels never fish for cod or any other fish within three miles of the Coast of Newfound- land. JOHN G. DENNIS COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS ESSEX SS GLOUCESTER July 28th 1877 Then personally appeared the above named John G. Dennis and made oath that all the foregoing statements by him subscribed were true to the best of his knowledge and belief before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 221. I Andrew Leighton of Gloucester in the county of Essex and Com- monwealth of Massachusetts being duly sworn do depose and say that I am fifty-four years old, and have been engaged in the fishing business both as fishermen and dealer for over thirty years, I have been en- gaged in the Newfoundland herring trade for eighteen years, during the winter principally at Fortune Bay, The Method of doing business is to send vessels from here to purchase cargoes of frozen herring from the fishermen on that coast, which are then carried to the United States and there sold. I have never caught any herring on the coast of New- foundland and I have never known of any American vessel doing SO. as it is much cheaper to buy them from the inhabitants who catch them in small boats, than to catch them ourselves—No objection has ever been made by the Government of Newfoundland to our purchasing her- ring there to my knowledge. the inhabitants are glad eneough to sell to us as they depend for their living entirely during the winter upon the trade with the American vessels— s ANDEREW LEIGHTON COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS. ESSEX SS. GLOUCESTER July 1877 Then personally appeared the abovenamed Andrew Leighton and made oath that all the foregoing statements by him subscribed are true to the best of his knowledge and belief, before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW - Notary Public AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3.293 No. 222. I Robert J. Reeves of Gloucester in the County of Essex and Com- monwealth of Massachusetts, being duly sworn do depose and say that I am thirty-nine years of age and am the Captain of the three-masted schooner William I Shepard of 475 tons burden, that I have been engaged in the Newfoundland herring trade for about eight years and during that time I made a voyage each Winter to the coast of Newfound- land usually to Fortune Bay for the purpose of purchasing cargoes of frozen herrings of the inhabitants, that I have never fished for herring on that Coast and have never known of any American vessels catching herring there. the usual course is for the American vessels to purchase their cargo from the fishermen paying them in gold from one to two dollars per barrel for the hering fresh, sometimes they pay for them in provisions but at the same rate as in money—Our vessels are not fur- nished for fishing and do not carry nets, they enter regularly at the Custom-house and when they cary goods with which to purchase the herring, they pay the duties—It is much cheaper for us to purchase the herring from the Newfoundland fishermen than to catch them ourselves, the inhabitants of the country around Fortune Bay depend during the Winter for their living entirely upon the trade with American vessels and without it they would soon starve; the American vessels pay on an average each from six hundred to one thousand dollars for the herring— No objection has ever been made to the Americans purchasing herring, to my knowledge, the inhabitants are glad to have Americans come as it is the only market they have for their herring during the winter— ROBERT J. REEVES COMMONWEALTEI OF MASSACEIUSETTS ESSEX SS GLOUCESTER July 1877 Then personally appeared the abovenamed Robert J. Reeves and made Oath that—all the foregoing facts were true to the best of his knowledge and belief before me— (Seal.) - DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 223. GLOUCESTER, Aug 18, 1877 I Wm. H Kirby was born in Reddington, Berkshire, England, and am 37 years of age and on oath do depose and say that I have been engaged in the American Fisheries 19 years I have been Master of the Schooners Eliza K Parker, B D Haskins Amos, Cutter, Ocean Lodge Right Bower, Chas A. Ropes Cornelius Stokem, of Gloucester & Salem State of Mass. I have been engaged in the Bank Fisheries for Cod & Halibut & Gulf of St Lawrence for Mackerel & Newfoundland and Magdelen Island Herring fishery. The American Cod & Halibut fishery is entirely a deep Sea fishery I always carried Clams and Porgie slivers and obtained the rest of my bait on the Banks viz (fishes peas & squid) I never took any Codfish or Halibut within three miles of the shore and none within 30 miles of land I went fifteen seasons in the Gulf of St Lawrence, occupy- ing about 5 months each season My highest stock from the Gulf of St Lawrence was $6,400,00 and my lowest $2300,00 An American vessel manned and equipped for a season of five months 3294. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. in the Gulf of St Lawrence must stock at least $6,000,00 to pay her bills. Very few vessels have paid their bills for the last 4 years in the Bay I carried no Seine but depended upon the hook & line I did not catch one fifth of my Mackerel within three miles. A purse seine as now used cannot well be used inshore I dressed most of my Mackerel outside, whenever we dress inshore the fishing boats from shore come off for the Mackerel Gills and offal to bait their trawls with. Most of the shore boats use trawls for fish. The Nova Scotia North Cape fishermen, that is Schooners, get all the Mackerel offal they can to bait their trawls. This bait is the best for Cod fishing Mackerel fit for the Market are Worth too much to use for bait for Cod fish to any extent I have been Ten Winters to Newfoundland for Herring. I carried nets only one voyage and that was last winter. I set my nets two nights the second night they were stolen. I had ever before bought my Her- ring from the Newfoundland fishermen, paying at the rate of one Dollar per Bbl in gold When I first went to Newfoundland the Inhabitants were very poor hardly owning a boat or net. They had no market for their Herring years ago except the Nova Scotia fishermen but upon the advent of the Americans fleet the prices rose from 3 shillings up to Ten Shilling per Barrel. The Merchants on the west side of Newfoundland send vessels to Fortune Bay for Herring and once had them at their own price. Now the American fishermen having raised the price paid to the poor operative the British traders cannot have them at their own price and pay for them in trade consequently they the traders are jealous of the Americans and would do anything to keep them away. The Amer- icans have absolutely raised up this population of poor operative fisher- men from poverty and made them independent in their business and of the grinding and debasing influence of the trading capitalist, if the fish- ermen were in the hands of the traders they would keep them at the Codfishery entirely and make them dependent on the traders, but now the fishermen can supply the American fleet with Herring and be inde- pendent and prosperous, there has long been this state of feeling there and it has culminated in various acts of violence Many of the operative fishermen now have good houses and own boats and nets where formerly they had neither, except a log hut, and all this is derived from the trade With Americans. • * The Magdalen Island fishery for Herring is carried on in the following manner. The American vessels do not go prepared to catch Herring. They go from Gloucester with 3 or 4 men and at Canso hire a Seine & Boats and men enough to handle it They pay for use of Seine 100 Dol- lars for a boat & man 40 Dollars for the trip generally hire 3 boats to each vessel and about six men. The English fishermen haul the Seine On shore with the Herring and the Americans, hire the herring brought of in boats by the people of the Island and in case of packing hire Women to dress and pack, The whole operative portion of the voyage being done by the inhabitants and they being paid for it. It is the general and universal custom to pack them on the vessel as there are no wharves and it would be very unhandy to do the work on the beach I never knew of Americans being denied the right to seine Herring at the Mag- dalen Islands I have never paid any Port Charges at these Islands or Customs duties At Fortune Bay Newfoundland they make us pay duties on Barrels and Salt whether they are landed or not. W. EI. KIRBY AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 3.295 COMMON WIEALTEI OF MASSA CHUSETTS COUNTY OF ESSEX SS. GLOUCESTER Aug. 18th 1877 Then personally appeared the above named William H. Kirby and made oath that all the above statements by him subscribed are true, to the best of his knowledge and belief before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 224. GLOUCESTER Aug 17, 1877 I, Byron Hines do depose and say that I was born in Pubnico, N, S, and am 40 years of age am now mastee of the Sch Grand Mastee of Pubnico N, S, am now engaged in fishing on the Grand Banks and delivering my fish at Gloucester Mass, have been engaged continously in the Bank fishery mostly, for the past 25 years am thoroughly ac- Quainted with the manner of obtaining bait at Newfoundland & Nova Scotia my experience has been that all vessels American English and French have bought their bait and paid for it in Cash—a large part of the fishing business of New Foundland is engaged in supplying this bait and is very profitable to those engaged in it, more so than any other fishery pursued by them—the American fleet have not taken bait only within the last three years at Newfoundland—I have never caught any bait there neither have I ever known any American vessel to catch bait at Newfoundland—there are 50 vessels of from 25 to 40 tons each constantly carrying bait from Newfoundland to the French Islands (St Perre & Mequelon) and the American fleet buy their bait largely at these places We pay more for the bait, as such, than in other form in which it can be used, and other supplies in the same ratio. I have paid $3, per Bbl for sound Herring this spring at N, F, if we could not obtain this bait we could supply its place with porgies & clam, & I think to our advantage—the Newfoundland vessels board American vessels miles from the Coast for the purpose of obtaining their trade and whole com- mimties have been built up and are in a prosperous condition wholly by this trade,-in going in to these places for bait the vessel will often lose a fortnights time—with my experience as a Bank fisherman I should say that it would be better to go without this bait, if all would do so— the American Cod and hoelibut fishery is wholly a Bank or deep sea fishery and not a shore fishery in any sense |BYERON ELINES COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ESSEX SS. GLOUCESTER Aug 17th 1877 Then personally appeared the above named Byron Hines and made oath that all the above statements by him subscribed are true, to the best of his knowledge & belief—before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 225. I William Greenleaf, Master of the Sch Chester R. Lawrence of Glou- cester, & formerly master of Schr's John S. Presson, F. W. Homans, Polar Wave, & Phoenix of said Gloucestee, born at Westport, Me. am 29 years of age do depose & say that I have been engaged in the fisheries for the 3296 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. past 18 years & master for the past 10 years. have been continously in the Grand Bank fishery for the last eight years. I have read the statement of Capt. C. H. Nute” of Sch Edward R. Webster and according to my experience is true in every respect—the last voyage I made to Newfound- land I paid $286, for bait the practice of buying bait at Newfoundland has Only existed about three years—the inhabetants afording every facility and anxious for the trade,-& have never known any American vessel to Catch Cod or Eſalibut within three miles of the shore. WILLIAM GREENLEAF (* See page 221.) COMMONWIEALTEI OF MASSA CHUSETTS ESSEX SS. GLOUCESTER Aug 13th 1877. Then personally appeared the above named William Greenleaf and made oath that all the above statements by him subscribed are true to the best of his knowledge and belief, before me (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW Notary Public No. 226. GLOUCESTER Aug 18 1877 I Harvey C Knowlton, born in Gloucester am 47 yeers of age and have been engaged in the fisheries, 25 years I was engaged in buying Herring at Newfoundland in the four successive winters of 1865, 1866, 1867, and 1868. These Herring were frozen for bait and for the fresh fish trade of New York and other American cities, I paid from one Dollar to One Dollar & seventy five cents per Barrel in gold, I bought the herring of the fishermen direct who were very glad to sell them. I have seen over 50 American vessels at one time taking Eſerring at Fortune Bay averaging $1200,00 each for the Herring bought When I first visited Fortune Bay the people were very poor this was the first commencement of the Herring trade by the Americans most of them living in log huts and subsisting on Herring and some potatoes. The prices of Herring has been increased largely by the American trade and at the rates now asked there can be no money made by buying them for the American market. The American demand for Herring can be supplied from the Eastern shores of Maine and the Bay of Fundy the voyage is not so dangerous and can be made more profitable. At the present time our Winter & spring fleet is largely supplied with Herring from Maine it being brought fresh by rail direct and at about the same cost. The American fleet is not dependent on Newfoundland for bait but use it as a convenience which they vastly overpay in the price paid for Herring at the present time Last Winter the Herring from Maine and Grand Menan completely glutted our Market and large quantities were thrown Overboard in the Harbor of Gloucester, being spoilt for want of cus- tomers, EIARVEY ENOWLTON JR MASS ESSEX. S. S. } 3. Personally appeared said Knowlton, and made oath to the truth of the above Statement. Before me AARON PARSONS Justice of the Peace. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3.297 No. 227. GLOUCESTER Aug 17, 1877. I Dennis C Murphy was born at St Johns Newfoundland am 39 years of age and on oath do depose and say that I have been engaged in the fish- eries 10 years from Gloucester on the Grand Banks and St peirre Bank I am thoroughly acquainted with the fisheries of Newfoundland. The universal practice of the American Fishermen is to buy bait of the Inhabitants and pay cash for it I have paid as low as one Dollar and as high as three Dollars in gold per Barrel for Herring bait at Newfound- land and from eighty cents to two Dollars per Hundred for Squid. It is only about 3 years since we have bought bait at Newfoundland I could buy bait at St peirres. I was the first Captain that bought bait at Conception Bay when I was in the Carrie T Dagle The Inhabitants of Newfoundland asked Ten Dollars a Ton for Ice and I would not pay it and went up to 47° north and took some from an Iceberg. The Cus- toms authorities make us pay Water taxes, heavy pilotage, all the sup- plies are charged at the highest rates. This trade with the Americans has made whole communities prosperous there is no other market for this bait except the fishing vessels, and Herring and Squid are so plenty that they are washed a shore on the beaches, there is a jealousy of the American fishermen because they are more successfull than their people I have never caught any fish within three miles of the British shores. The American Cod and Halibut fisheries are exclusively a deep sea fish- ery within no national jurisdiction. I never knew of any American vessel selling fish at Newfoundland the small Codfish are just as good to strip up as the large, I never fished for bait on the British coast and I know that every American Vessel that takes bait at Newfound- land buys and pays for it in cash If we did not take bait at Newfound- land we could use Porgie and clams, takeng them from the United States and at no greater cost, I have been Master of the Schooners, James Bliss, Harvey C Mackey Lizzie A Tarr, Frank A. Williams Wachusett, Lizzie K Clark, Carrie T Dagle, Centennial, all are engaged in the bank fisheries. I have stocked as high as $17,000,00 a year in this business and as low a $9,000,00 a year. - - D C MURPEIY COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS |BSSEX SS. AUGUST 18th 1877 Then personally appeared the above named Dennis C. Murphy and made oath that all the above statements by him subscribed are true, to the best of his knowledge and belief. before me : (Seal.) DAVID W. LOW - * Notary Public No. 228. PROVINCE OF QUEBEC IDISTRICT AND COUNTY OF GASPI; GASPſ. BASIN August 1st 1877 I, the undersigned, John S. Ascah,-of Gaspé Bay,+North—Master of the schooner “Seaflower” of Gaspé Basin, do hereby solemnly de- clare as follows viz— # g That for thirty five years I have been engaged in the Whale—Cod— 207 F 3.298 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. and Mackerel fisheries—of the waters of the Gulf of St Lawrence and the Coast of Labrador, in charge of a fishing schooner,-Whaling in the Straits of Belle Isle and to the Northwards—Codfishing in the gulf and on the coast of Labrador—And taking Mackerel in the Bay de Chaleur —In the years 1850 to 1856—I fished in company with American fisher- men—and often had the use of their Seines to draw my bait—without charge—willingly granted—and moreover always kindly assisted when required—and I know personally of valuable services rendered freely by them to a number of our Gaspé fishermen—I do not hesitate to say that I believe candidly—speaking—and unprejudiced Gaspé fishermen, firmly believe that the greater their intercourse—and dealings with American fishermen in Canadian waters—the greater they profit by the inter- course : which is the experience, of former years, for, Comparatively, but few American fishermen have been seen in these waters for the last ten years—I have not seen Americans curing fish or drying nets on the shores of the Gulf waters.-Mackerel fishing—was their chief fishery— but for the last ten years—this fish has been disappearing ;-and to such an extent—that now I would consider—it, undoubtedly—a very risky enterprise to fit out a schooner, even from here, to engage in that branch of the fisheries. If Canadian fishermen had the means—or were independent—they could take their fish and oil to markets in the United States and make greater profits than American fishermen in their own ports.-That is obvious. Our fishing and coasting schooners are about—from forty to seventy-five tons burthen j-the larger size costing about four thousand dollars:—wages to men are $16. (a) $20 per month—and provisions are much lower in price than in the United States.—It seems as if enter- prise—was wanting, that more fish is not taken to the Uuited States by Canadians—while it is exempt from duty. • JOHN S ASCAEI Declared and Subscribed to before me, this first day of August 1877, at Gaspé Basin - (Seal.) g GEO : H. HOLT U. S. Consul No. 229. PORT OF GASPſ. COUNTY AND DISTRICT OF GASPE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC I—Benjamin Asselin, Master of the British schooner “Speedy,” of Gaspé, do hereby solemnly declare, that I have been connected, with the fishery business of the Gulf of St Laurence for about twenty four years and that for the greater period of that time—the transportation of fish has been my chief employment ;-between the fishery stations and the shipping ports;–that my vocation has afforded me an experience of the fisheries in the gulf, which is not excelled—if equalled—by others;– that from my own personal knowledge, I am aware that the mackerel fishery has been declining for several years past and I consider that it has now become so reduced and precarious as to offer no encouragement for the pursuit of that enterprise in these waters. My occupation brings me annually,–during the fishing season, in the close vicinity of many of the principal fishery stations in the Gulf— and I am enabled to say that American fishermen have not been accus- tomed to land on the shores to dry nets, cure fish &tc—as a practice— so far as I have been able to observe;—in accordance with the privilege granted to them by the Treaty of Washington of 1871,– Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. . 3.299 I am positive that the inhabitants of the coasts have derived much benefit from the visits and intercourse of American fishermen formerly— by the improvement in their trade—by selling supplies and bait. I further declare that I have given this subject much reflection and deem it right to freely express my belief as herein noted. The Words “twenty-four years” added on the margin before signing - Gaspé June 18th 1877 - - BENJAMIN ASSELIN Declared and subscribed to, this eighteenth day of June 1877. before me at Gaspé * r - (Seal.) GEO : H. HOLT - U. S. Consul No. 230. * PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF GASPE Doug LASTOWN August 6th 1877. I, the undersigned,—Luke M'Auley of Douglastown—in the Bay of Gaspé do hereby solemnly declare as follows. Viz— That I have been fishing in and about the Bay of Gaspé for about forty years—without intermission—during the fishing seasons—taking principally codfish and mackerel—That from the year 1866—until the present time, the Mackerel fishery has been very poor—I have had inter- course with a great many American fishermen during my life time, in the Bay of Gaspé—previous to the year 1866.—and very frequently have. sold them supplies—and often have received valuable assistance from, them on the fishing grounds, and I know of many of my neighbors who have also received benefits—without charge, at their hands—And, my firm opinion is that they are of far more benefit to our fishermenin-in these waters—than detrimental to our successful pursuit of the fisher- ies—In fact they were always ready and willing to render assistance to us fishermen when we needed—and I have heard many of my neighbors. express themselves to this effect— I have never seen American fishermen cure fish or dry their nets on Shore— * My experience with American fishermen has been such that Iºwould be pleased to see them at all times in our waters—Many years and many times they have been to my house and spent hours with my family—and I have never seen them misbehave themselves. - Our vessels cost so much less than American vessels—and, sailing. them at so much less expense—there is no reason why Canadianafisher- men could not sell fish and oil at a greater profit in the markets of the United States than American fishermen in their own ports— . There is no fishermen, now here, who has fished in the Bay of Gaspé— longer than I have—or as long. *- LUKE MCAULEY Subscribed and declared before me this sixth day of August 1877, at Douglastown * - GEO : H HQ.I.T (Seal.) , - - U. S. Oomswº No. 231. 4. PROVINCE OF QUEBEg: DISTRICT AND COUNTY OF GASPé, * GASPſ, BASIN July 9th 1877 I, the undersigned,—John Howell—of Sandy Beach—Gaspé, -Mas: ter—(and part owner) of the Schooner “Undaunted”—of the Port of 3300 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Gaspé; do—hereby declare solemnly that—I am now about forty-eight years of age—that since the age of eleven years, I have been constantly engaged in the business of the fisheries,—both in fishing and transport- ing fish.-in the Gulf of St Lawrence along the North shore from Natashquan to the Moisie river,-and off the North side of Anticosti, —taking codfish—only.—excepting Halibut when caught on the lines.— (but we do not fish for the latter purposely.—). We do not catch one half of the quantity of fish we caught about eighteen years ago—.on an average—The fisheries have evidently declined for a number of years past—from What cause—it is impossible to say— Mackerel fish are disappearing from their former usual haunts.— About eleven years ago—on the North, side of Anticosti—we seined in our boats—about two hundred barrels in one fishing Season—but since that time the Mackerel have appeared there but once in numbers—and we have had no other opportunity to make a haul of them—as they clear right away again—immediately after showing themselves—and we can- not tell where they go to.—American fishing vessels used to be seen by us in large numbers about fifteen years ago—but since that time they are only rarely seen—in our fishing waters—excepting near the Magdalen Islands,-& Prince Edward Island. In my experience of about thirty seven years on the water—and coast, I cannot remember to have seen American fishermen curing fish or drying nets on shore, with the exception of one summer at Grande Grave, Gaspé Bay,+many years ago. I consider that it is a great advantage to the people of the shores —for American fishermen to buy bait, supplies—&te from them—for they profit by the transactions—and get money—which they would not otherwise get.—In the days when the Mackerel fishing was good—the people did well—for Americans spent a good deal of money on the coast. For the last twelve or fourteen years I have been fishing regu- larly off the coast of Anticosti,-during the fishing seasons, with my own vessel and crew, and am intimately acquainted with the fisheries around that island—my opinion is that Mackerel will never appear again at Anticosti as in former years—they are too long gone now— I believe that from the less cost of building, equipping, and man- ning our fishing vessels, and being upon the spot—that, we could take our fish into American ports—and undersell American fishermen in their own markets—if we possessed the energy to make the attempt— I declare solemnly to my belief in the truth of the foregoing state- ment which I have made with deliberation. - , - - JOHN EHOWELL Declared and subscribed to before me, this ninth day of July 1877, at Gaspé Basin : - (Seal.) º, GEO : H HOLT— - - U. S. Consul No. 232. PROVINCE OF QUEBEC *. GASPF, BASIN June 23rd. 1877 I.—William Howell—of Sandy Beach—Gaspé Bay,+do hereby Sol- emnly declare—that my occupation is that of a fisherman—that. I have fished in the bay of Gaspé;—off Island of Anticosti, and Straits of Labra- dor—for Mackerel—Godfish and Whales—Herring &c.—for the past twenty six years—on the best fishing grounds of the Gulf of St Law- rence and adjacent waters.-In former years—say from 1854—to 1865– I have been accustomed to take during the fishing Season—from fifteen AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION, 3301 to thirty barrels of Mackerel per boat with two men :-that previous to that time the catch was about one third larger—but since the year 1865 the Mackerel fishery has been declining so that I have not been able to catch more than from one to five barrels per boat—in the fishing seasons —in the bay of Gaspé—which in former years was considered the best fishing bay in northern waters—My catch for the last two years was One half barrel of mackerel each year—I live on the shore of the fishing ground and pay particular attention to the movements of mackerel espec- ially,–I believe the fish come in about two thirds less than formerly to the bay—but only to spawn—they won’t bite and go out again—& I am Well aware that they do spawn in our bay,+When we can catch any— it is only in stormy weather—Up to the year 1855. I have seen as many as Sixty five sail of American fishing vessels—in the bay of Gaspé— filling rapidly with Mackerel—at the same time.—Since then—the num- ber of American vessels fishing in the bay has been annually decreasing —For the last few years—they have rarely appeared—Last year two American fishing vessels came in but did not succeed in finding fish-I have conversed with my neighbors—who are also fishermen, frequently, and they agree with me in the opinion that the American fishermen in Our Waters have been of no detriment to our fisheries—but on the con- trary have been beneficial to us by their intercourse in purchasing bait and Supplies—besides it is a known fact that we have caught more Mackerel when they have been in our proximity—Unfortunately for us —since they have acquired the right by the Treaty to the inshore fish- eries—we have seen less of them than before— The honest and candid belief and expression of the fishermen of the Coast is that the American fishermen have done no damage to the Ca- Inadian fisheries— The Fishery of the Mackerel in the Province of Quebec is only pur- Sued by catching by boats—and nets—No vessels fitted out for this fish- ery—Canadian fishermen—in the Gulf do not fish for Halibut—but Occasionally they are taken on the Cod lines— My experience in the fisheries has been—as I have observed—of many years—and there are but few men on the Coast who do not know me as a fisherman— - I Subscribe to this with a full knowledge of its Contents— ". & * WILLIAM HOWELL Declared and subscribed to before me this twenty third day of June 1877, at Gaspé Basin - & (Seal.) GEO : H HOLT * *. - U. S. Consul No. 233. * PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT AND COUNTY OF GASPE— GASPá BASIN July 28th 1877 I—the Undersigned, Charles Stewart—of New Carlisle—Gaspé— Now—Master of the Schooner “IP. Palmer" of Gaspé—do hereby Solemnly declare—as follows—I am about fifty-seven years of age,_ for about thirty years I have been in command of a vessel employed in the business of the fisheries of the Gulf of St Lawrence—and have had ample opportunities to observe the yield of the various fisheries along the Coasts and shoals of the Gulf for many years past.—It is many years Since I have seen American fishermen—fishing for Cod fish near the Shore and in all my experience on the waters of the Gulf I have never 3302 AwarD of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. observed them (American fishermen) Curing fish, or drying their nets on shore—I have seen them buying bait and Supplies from the residents of the Coasts—in former years;—and know of no Case—where, in these dealings they have given dissatisfaction—but on the contrary—I believe that their presence in the vicinity of the fishing people has been of advantage to the latter—and to be desirable—Since the Mackerel have disappeared from their usual haunts, within a few years past, American fishermen have been rarely seen in the bay of Gaspé—formerly one of the finest fishing grounds for Mackerel— It is a well known fact that Canadians can build vessels cheaper and sail them at a lower cost, than Americans—and the fish being at their very doors—as it were— it is plain that Canadian fishermen should be able to carry their fish to American ports.—and make better sales as to profit—the duty being off,-than American fishermen who have to come So far from their own ports— OEIARLES STEWART Declared and Subscribed to before me this twenty eighth day of July 1877 GEO : H HOLT (Seal.) .* U. S. Consul No. 234. - GLOUCESTER, Sept. 21, 1877. I, Christopher C. Poole, Master of the American schooner John Wesley, do on oath depose and say, that I was born in Rockport, Mass.; have been engaged in the fisheries for over 30 years. I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence mackereling 30 seasons. My highest stock there was 3,500 dollars for a season. Last year was my poorest season, stocking only 200 dollars. I bought the John Wesley in 1866; during that time she has been six years mackereling, and five years coasting. Previous' to this she was owned at Cape. Cod. She is 42 tons new measurement, will carry 300 barrels. I always fished at the Magdalen Islands, which is the principal American fishing ground. I have taken a good many mackerel on Banks Orphan and Bradley, and in my experience, I have never taken one barrel of mackerel in ten within the three-mile limit. I have just arrived from the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and brought home 190 barrels that I bought from the English boat fishermen. I went prepared to fish with my own vessel, but finding the prospect so poor, I bought these mackerel and came home. & I bought my mackerel for two cents apiece out of the boats, averaging 300 to a barrel. * sº I cannot save myself a dollar by this trip. I left the Gulf the 5th of September. I saw many American vessels at Port Hood and at Canso, and none of them had done anything. Some vessels left the Bay with- out having been able to take a single mackerel. This is about as poor a season as I have ever witnessed in the Bay, and with few exceptions, every vessel there will fail to pay their expenses. - CEHRISTOPEIER. C. POOLE. CoMMON WEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, Essex ss., GLOUCESTER, Sept. 21st, 1877. Subscribed and sworn to by above named Christopher C. Poole, before me ? DAVID W. LOW, Notary Public. . Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3303 No. 235. GLOUCESTER, Sept. 17, 1877. I, Russell D. Terry, born in Nova Scotia, master of the American schooner Addie R. Terry, do on oath depose and say that I have just . returned from a trip to the coast of Maine for mackerel, having been absent four weeks. I landed 20 bbls. No. 1 Mackerel, “ “ 130 4. 4 2 4% { % {{ 62 4 “ 3 4 worth and sold for 2,376 dollars. The average catch during the time I was there was 100 bbls. to each vessel. I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence 17 seasons. My best stock there for a full season was 8000 dollars. My poorest stock for a full SeaSOn was 500 dollars. - I caught the most of my mackerel around the Magdalens and some at P. E. Island. I think including the years previous to 1870 that one fifth of the mackerel I took were taken within the three mile limit including the Magdalen Islands. I consider that to be a fair estimate for the other American vessels that were in gompany with me. CAPT. RUSSELL. D. TERRY. ESSEX, S. S., } GLOUCESTER, Sept. 17, 1877. Personally appeared the above named Russell D. Terry who sub- scribed and made oath that the above statement is true, before me. ADDISON CARTER, Justice of the Peace and Spec. Dep. Collector of Customs for DISTRICT OF GLOUCESTER. No. 236. I, William Herrick, of Swan's Island, Me., on oath, depose and say, that I am master of Schooner Cyanne, of Salem, Mass. That I have just arrived from the Gulf of St. Lawrence, from a mackerel voyage. The said schooner went through the Strait of Canso the 11th day of July, 1877. Between Cape George and Port Hood, we caught our first fish, 25 wash barrels, from 8 to 10 miles from shore. On the North side of East Point, of Prince Edward Island, we took 200 wash barrels, caught in four schools, the one nearest the land was over 3 miles off, the others, 6, or more miles off. This was the 17th or 18th of July. Two days after- wards, at same place, took 90 wash barrels, 60 of them from one school, over 4 miles from land, and 30 in another school within 3 miles from the land or shore. Took 15 wash barrels off Kildare, within three miles from shore, (about two and-a-half miles). The balance of my trip, I picked up on the hook, scattering from 4 to 10 miles from shore, cruis- ing in Bay of Chaleur, down along the Island, and to Port Hood. Found no mackerel in Bay Chaleur, and very few anywhere. Spoke 25 sail of vessels in my cruise, who all reported mackerel very scarce. Finding nothing to stop for, and no prospect ahead of finding mackerel, I left for home, and arrived at Gloucester, Aug. 30th, 1877, with 320 sea bar- rels, and packed out about 300. (3304 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. That I chartered my vessel for $225 per month, of Charles E. Fabens, of Salem, finding my own Seines and Gear. * Charter of Vessel, 2 months. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... $450 Seines, (2), Boat's Value, $2,000, 2 months use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 Outfits of Provisions, Lines, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400 16 hands (a) $30 per Month, 2 Months. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sº e s = ºn tº e º a º 960 Captain's Wages, 2 Months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 Insurance of Seines and Seine Boats. . . . . . . . . . . . . . * - - - - - - - - - - 30 Salt- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - & sº sº e s tº a dº º is e tº a sº ºn a sº º - e º e º s as a tº as a w as s ºn s e g º v e º as 140 $2,430 RECEIPTs. 10 bbls. No. 1's a $ 16, $160 170 “ No. 2's (a) 104, \ 1,785 120 “ NO. 3'S (2) 7#, * 900 $2,845 STOCK EXPENSE. 25 bbls. Pogie bait, r $162.50 Packing 300 bbls., and Barrels, &c., 525,00 687,50 $2,157.50 2,157.50 Actual loss by the voyage, $ 272.50 That this trip is the best one brought home from the Gulf of St Law- rence this season. That my men were hired on shares, but in the above estimate of the Voyage, I have charged as wages what is paid to the crew of the schooner John Gerard, of Newburyport, whose whole crew are on Wages, instead of shares. -- I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence ten seasons, five of which as master. Have fished in all parts of the Gulf, and consider myself well posted in its fisheries. I was master of schr Amos Cutter the last year previous to this. That I was in the Gulf four years ago. We took 40 barrels, not one fish of which, do I believe, we caught within the three mile limit from shore. Was gone two and a-half months, and tried every- where that mackerel are likely to be found in the Fall of the year with- out success. Six years ago, I was in the Gulf, in the schr Wm. J. Dale, and took 260 barrels in a two months voyage, all of which, with excep- tion of 20 barrels, were caught at the Magdalene Islands—the 20 barrels were caught 20 miles from shore of Cape Miscou. This trip sold for six dollars and fifty cents per barrel, and was a losing voyage. During the five seasons in the Gulf as master, I have brought home 1300 barrels of ºre, not over 250 barrels were caught within three miles from the Sil OI’6”. - In all my experience, during the ten years I have fished in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, the vessel I was in myself, nor any vessel I ever saw or heard of, ever interfered with the boat fishermen in any manner, the best of feeling always existing between the American and English fish- ermen. When anchored inshore, they always come aboard, and got a little bait; and I never knew, or heard of a fleet of American fishermen running in among boat fishermen for maekerel, but have seen British boats a great many times run out among the fleet while fishing. * AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3305 I have trans-shipped mackerel twice, the first time from Canso. The vessel was so long coming (four weeks) that we gained by it, mackerel rising in value. I was then in the Barbara Fritchie, and sent home 260 barrels. The second time, from Charlottetown, by steamer, sending home 150 barrels from same schooner, costing $1.00 per barrel to get them home. In the six weeks following, I only took 40 barrels of mackerel, which was all I did take for that trip, besides what had been . sent home, and would have made money not to have trans-shipped any mackerel home, but have taken them home in the schooner. All the years I have been to the Gulf, $100, in gold, each year, on an average, was paid to British traders for goods, for which we paid more than we could have procured them for at home. The last three years I have been fishing off our American shores in schrs Glad Tidings and Rebecca M. Atwood. In the schr. Glad Tidings we landed 1750 barrels of mackerel, stocking $13,600—met stock. In the Atwood, two years ago, we landed 900 barrels of mackerel, stocking $10,300, net. Last year, in same schooner, (Rebecca M. Atwood), we landed 2700 barrels of mackerel, net stock, being $11,000. That the mackerel being small here, the first of season, and hearing of large quantities of mackerel being in the Bay, I was induced to go there, much to my sorrow and regret now, for I found that I had been deceived by the stories told, and despatches published in the papers, to draw American fishermen to the Gulf of St. Lawrence this year. I feel satisfied, that had I remained on our own shores, I should have done much better. Our shore mackerel are better in quality than Bay. WILLIAM EIERRICK. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS, County OF ESSEx, ss. GLOUCESTER, Sept. 4th, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named William Herrick, and made oath that all his statements above subscribed are true, to the best of his knowledge and belief, before me, (L. S.) DAVID W. LOW, Notary Public. NO. 237. GLOUCESTER, Aug. 28, 1877. I, Thomas H. White, master of the schooner Hyperion, of Gloucester, Mass., do on Oath depose and say:— - I was born in Margaree, Cape Breton; am 29 years of age; have been engaged in the fisheries for the past 17 years. I have been master of the schooners John T. Tyler, Finance, and my present vessel, the Hyperion. I have just returned from a trip to the Gulf of St. Lawrence for mack- erel. I brought home 225 sea-barrels of mackerel, mostly twos. I com- menced to fit my vessel on the 1st of July, and sailed from Gloucester on the 5th ; arrived in the Bay on the 12th of July. My first mackerel I took off East Point on the hook, (I had no seine) about 15 wash barrels 2 miles from the shore, and of the remainder of the trip of mackerel we took certainly one-half inside of the three mile limit and the rest out- side. t - The charter of my vessel is worth for two months. . . . . . ..... $500.00 My men's time is worth $30 per month; 14 men at $30, 2 months each. ----- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900. 00 Outfits . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - as gº ºn tº e º se e º ºs w tº gº tº a gº tº gº º so e º 'º A sº e ºs e º gº tº º 600, 00 3306 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 100. 00 41 Bbls. Bait, $4 per bbl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164. 00 Packing. - - - - - - - - - ‘e sº sº se a • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * e : , - - - - - - - - - - - - 154. 00 Lines, &c.-----------------------. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 25. 00 $1943. 00 Receipts: 205 packed bbls, at $114...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2300.00 Net profit-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $357. 00 When I first arrived in the Bay I thought the prospect was good for a large catch, when I came away it looked altogether different. There was about 100 sail of American vessels there and those that we spoke would average from 25 to 50 barrels each. I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence mackereling four seasons. My highest stock for a whole season was $4,500. My lowest stock was $3,000. Any American ves- sel as they are now fitted must stock $4,500 for a seasons mackereling in the Gulf to pay their bills. I have fished part of two seasons off the American coast for mackerel. I made on one trip 52 dollars in 3 weeks. I also made three trips taking two months time and made over 100 dollars. I have been boat fishing from Margaree and it is the general practice to throw offal overboard. I never heard of such a thing as injury to the fish from this source. If this had been an injury there would not be any fish in the Gulf now. The American cod and halibut fishery is a deep sea fishery entirely. IFrom my experience in the mackerel fisheries of the Gulf of St. Lawrence the American vessels do not take more than one-third of their mackerel within three miles of the shore, that is not including the Magdalen Islands. There has been a good deal of trading by American vessels which is an advantage to the people. I am of the opinion that from my knowledge of the people there is a strong prejudice against the Ameri- can fishermen. I should say this sentiment has been fostered for a pur- pose. As a general thing heretofore the people on the coast have been very friendly and never before have I heard any complaints by the boat fishermen or traders of the American fishermen. The people were always glad to have them come to trade with them and it has been a great help in many ways to the people living near the shore to have the American fleet down there giving employment to the men and buying of the farm- ers and traders. Any other ideas I think must be born of prejudice as any one disposed to be fair will say. - I know that the average catch of American vessels for the last 15 years in the Gulf of St. Lawrence is not over 350 barrels each. I have been one trip to Newfoundland for herring. I bought my herring of the peo- ple and paid for it mostly in cash. It is of great advantage to the people of Newfoundland to have the Americans buy their herring, They would almost be in a starving condition if it were not for this trade. THOMAS H. WHITE. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, - COUNTY OF EssEx, ss., GLOUCESTER, August 28th, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named Thomas H. White and made oath that all the above statesment by him subscribed are true, before me, - - - DAVID W. LOW, (L. S.) . . . Notary Public. AWARD OF TEIE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 3307 No. 238. GLoucestER, Aug. 28, 1877. I, Charles Lee, Master of the schooner I. I. Clark, of Gloucester, on oath do depose and say, that I was born in New York, am 40 years of age, and have been engaged in the fisheries 20 years. I have just returned from a trip to the Gulf of St. Lawrence. I commenced to fit my vessel for this trip on the 1st of J gly, sailed from Gloucester on the 5th of July, arrived in the Bay on the 12th of July. I caught my first mackerel off the east point P E. Island, taking One hundred barrels in the Seine. This was outside of the three-mile limit; caught the rest of my trip—130 barrels—on the hook, about 12 to 15 miles from the shore of Prince Edward Island. We set our Seine about 20 times to take what mackerel we got in it. The entire time con- sumed in this trip is just two months. My vessel is nearly new ; cost $9,000. She is 70 tons new measurement, carries 14 men. My two Seines and boat cost me $1,500. The charter of my vessel is worth $250 per month . . . . . . . . $500 00 The Wear and tear of Seines, boats, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 00 Wages of 14 men two months, at $30 per month . . . . . . . . . . 900 00 Ontfits, including provisions, brls. Salt etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 00 Insurance - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 100 00 Packing -----, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 173 00 Lines, hooks, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * • * ~ * * * * * * * * * * * 25 00 Total cost of trip ................................. $2,498 00 - RECEIPTS. - 230 barrels of mackerel, at $11} . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 645 00 Net profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . --------. .----------- $147 00 With one exception, this is the best trip taken that I know of in the Bay this year. I spoke a number of American vessels when I came out of the Bay, and they would not average 25 brls. each. I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence 13 seasons mackereling; about ten years as master of the vessel. During that time it was necessary to stock 5,000 dollars in a season, in the Bay, to pay the bills. I have, as a general thing, done much better than the average of American vessels in the Bay. Most of the time I have owned my vessel. I have also fished for mackerel on the American shore, and I have always done better there than in the Bay; take ten consecutive years, and I have landed double the amount of mackerel from shore mackereling than from Bay mackereling, and the American shore mackerel are of better quality and sell for more money. In all the mackereling I have done in the Bay I have not taken one barrel in ten within three miles of the shore. The boat fishing from the shore is seldom, or ever, interfered with by the schooners, and I never knew of any boat being injured by our vessels. I have always found the people anxious for us to trade with them, and in the trans-shipment of mack- erel a large portion used to be in British bottoms, before the Steamer I'Ull]. I have been to the Magdalens this Spring for herring, in the schooner Orient, 94 tons. Took 652 brls. of herring for Boston. We calculated to take 1,400. We bought all our herring from the English seiners. We hired boats at Canso to take the herring from the Seine to our ves- 3308 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. sel; this is the universal custom of American vessels. All the labor and profits of the taking is with the British subjects. There was over 50 sail of American vessels there, and some got no herring at all ; and no vessel while I was there got fully loaded. Both the herring and mackerel fisheries are very uncertain. g > In the Newfoundland herring fishery I have always bought and paid for the herring in cash. The Newfoundland Customs Officers oblige American vessels to pay duties on barrels in which the herring are packed, although the barrels are never landed or leave the vessels, but are carried down there and brought away without touching the shore. They also charge light dues, averaging 25 dollars to each American ves- sel; in fact, there are no fees neglected. The American cod and hali- but fishery is purely a deep-sea fishery. The few American vessels that. go into the Gulf of St. Lawrence for codfish, take them 12 to 15 miles from the shore, or on Banks Bradley or Orphan. The throwing over- board of mackerel cleanings never injured the mackerel or fish. I never heard of such a thing. CHARLES LEE. I, John F. Peoples, having been on this trip, this last two months, to the Gulf of St. Lawrence, hereby on oath declare that the statement is true in every particular. y JOEIN F. PEEPLES. COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS. COUNTY OF EssEx, ss. GLOUCESTER, Aug. 28, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named Charles Lee and John F. Peeples, and made oath that all the statements subscribed to by said Lee are true to the best of their knowledge and belief. t - - Before me, (L. S.) * DAVID W. LOW. Motary Public. NO. 239. I, Joseph McPhee, of Gloucester, in the State of Massachusetts, ship carpenter, on oath, depose and say, that I was born in Prince Edward Island; that in the year 1860 I was with my brother Capt. Daniel McPhee (now deceased) in sch. Daniel McPhee, of Gloucester, that said schooner fitted at the firm of Sinclair and Low, that on our first trip to the Gulf of St. Lawrence in the summer of 1860, we took dories, that we tried for mackerel at Seven Island's, found none, got a few off Bartlett's Cove, tried off Mount Louis and Madeline River and went home in September with sixteen or seventeen barrels of mackerel. That Joseph Campbell was not in said schooner the trip above mentioned, nor was he one of the crew the fall trip of said schooner in which we caught most of our trip of 125 bbls. of mackerel off Magdalen Islands, between 10 and 15 miles south east from Entry Island. Some were caught off Malpeque and some off Margaree. That of said catch less than one- tenth of them were caught within three miles from the shore; that we took no dories on our second trip and did not go to the Seven Islands. JOSEPH MCPHEE. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, COMMONWEATH OF MASSACHUSETTS, County OF ESSEx, S. S., CITY OF GLOUCESTER. Personally appeared before me, this twenty-first day of September, A. D. 1877, the above-named Joseph McPhee, to me well known, and Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3309 made solemn oath to the truth of the foregoing statement by him sub- Scribed. * - * * CYRUS STORY, Notary Public in and for said County. No. 240. I, William Parsons, 2nd, of Gloucester, in the State of Massachusetts, on oath depose and say, that I am senior member of the firm of William Parsons, 2nd, & Co., owners and fitters of schooner Gen'l Burnside, that said schooner went to the Gulf of St. Lawrence from said firm only two seasons 1864 and 1865; that in 1864 I find in the crew list of said schooner the name of J. McDonald whose share of the trip in said schooner was $121.60; the vessels share was $2,242.84; that said vessel was engaged in making her one voyage in 1864, from August 1st to November 10th, and packed out 462 barrels of mackerel. WM. PARSONS, 2nd. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS, ESSEX, SS., GLOUCESTER, Sept. 21st, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named William Parsons, 2nd, and made oath that the above statement by him subscribed is true, before me 7 DAVID W. LOW, Notary Public. No. 241. I, Solomon Pool, a resident of Gloucester, in the State of Massachu- setts, on oath, depose and say, that I was formerly of the firm of Pool and Cunningham and part owner and fitter of the schooner Daniel Web- ster, that I have examined the books of said firm and find that said schooner in the year 1859 made two trips to the Gulf of St. Lawrence after mackerel, that she was engaged from the last of June till Novem- ber 23rd; that from her first trip was packed two hundred and fifty-one and one-half barrels. (251%) only. Her net stock amounting to $1,936.72, one half of which was shared among her crew. That from her second trip to the Bay, was packed twenty (20) barrels of mackerel only. Her net stock amounting to $164.10, one half of which was shared among her crew. - - * ~ * - - 3. That I have looked for the name of James or Joseph Campbell on my books, and cannot find it neither name appearing on them. Jº º- ºr *- * * * * . ... + = - SOLOMON POOL, Subscribed and sworn to by above named Solomon Pool, this day of September, A. D., 1877, before me. - - DAVID W. LOW, - Notary Public. No. 242. \ . GLOUCESTER, October 10th, 1877. I, Benjamin Swim of Gloucester, Mass., on oath depose and say, that I was born at Barrington, Nova Scotia, am 27 years of age, and am now Master of schooner Sarah O. Pyle, of Gloucester, and have been since April of this year—have been engaged in codfishing during that time, have landed 150,000 lbs. of codfish and, about 3,000 lbs. of hali- but; and caught them all, both codfish and halibut, on Western Banks. 3310 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. The nearest to the shore that I have caught fish of any kind this year is at least forty miles. BENJAMIN SWIM, Master of schr. Sarah C. Pyle. ESSEX SS. - * GLOUCESTER, Oct. 10, 1877. Personally appeared the above named Benj. Swim, Master of schr. Sarah C. Pyle, who subscribed and made oath that the above statement by him subscribed is true. Before me, $ --- ADDISON CARTER, (L. S.) Justice of the Peace and Deputy Collector of Customs. No. 243. \ GLOUCESTER, Aug. 29, 1877. I, Charles F. Carter, Master of the schr. Falcon, of Gloucester, Mass., do on oath depose and say, that I was born at Steep Creek, in the Strait of Canso, Nova Scotia, am 39 years of age, have been engaged in the fisheries 28 years. I have just returned from a trip from the Gulf of St. Lawrence. I commenced to fit my vessel on the 1st of July, 1877, sailed from Gloucester on the 9th, arrived in the Bay on the 14th. Got 30 barrels on the first day; caught them with a hook in Antigonish Bay. We caught them all of five miles from the shore. Went down to the East Point, P. E. Island; 10 miles from East Point took a small school in the Seine; took 20 brls. Afterward, cruised up the Gulf into the Bay of Chaleurs, to Bathurst; never got a mackerel, and never saw one; then run down to the Magdalen Islands; took 75 brls. on the hook, 5 miles from Brine Island. The remainder of my trip, or fare, I took in various places south of P. E. Island. Took about five barrels inshore, not half mile off. I brought home 132 sea barrels, mostly No. 2's. The whole time employed in this trip is just two months. I carried a Seine-boat and two seines. * The Charter of my vessel is worth $250 per month. . . . . . . . . $500 00 Crew of 14 Men—wages at $30 per month. . . . . . * º ºs º ºs º dº sº º us tº 700 00 Outfits - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 600 ()0 TWO Seines and Boat—use and wear. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 00 Insurance . . . . . . -----------, ---------------------------- 100 00 Lines, &c. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * > ºn e º ºs º ºs e º ºs º ºs º is sº me us tº º ºs º ºs º ºs - 25 00 Total cost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $2,125 00 Inspection and Packing 115 barrels............ . . . . . . . we º 'º a 86 25 RECEIPTs. 115 packed barrels Mackerel, at $11.50 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,322 50 Actual loss. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . as gº ºn tº º & º º ºs º ºs $888 75 I have been seven seasons in the Gulf of St. Lawrence mackereling. The highest stock I ever made there in a season was $4,200.00. My lowest stock is this year (that is so far), and I consider the prospect there hopeless for the rest of the year. I have fished four years from Canso, in the shore boat—fishing, principally for codfish. - I never knew of any interference or injury from American vessels to the English boats. We always, in these boats, dressed our fish going AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3311 in, throwing the offal overboard. I never heard of such a thing as in- jury to the fish, in throwing over fresh offal. In all my experience in American vessels, I never knew of any collisions with the boat fisher- men ; on the contrary, the best of feeling has ever been manifested, the boat fishermen coming on board the American vessels for bait, and also to grind their bait in our mills. This last trip I gave away more than three barrels of bait to the boat fishermen. I know that there is less than one fourth of the mackerel taken by the American fleet, taken within three miles. Distance on the water is very deceptive, and look- ing from the shore any one would be liable to be deceived in the dis- tance a vessel was from the shore, especially, when the water is smooth. I have often to settle a question among the crew, put over the patent log, and run, and in variably the distance supposed to be three miles would tally over five miles. This will account for much of the mistaken Statements of people on shore, as to distance on the water, especially Off high lands. I have been mackereling more or less on the American shore for nearly 20 years. I have stocked on one year's mackereling, off the American shore, $13,600.00, and my lowest stock in any one year was $7,200.00. I stocked on the American shore mackereling, last year, $11,000.00. - This year I have seen many of the fish called albicores in the Gulf, in the Bay of Chaleur, and all along the coast. I consider this fish as fatal to the mackerel and menhadden, as wolves would be among sheep. I have seen none of these fish for a number of years before this year, and I am of the opinion, firmly, that the scarcity of mackerel in the Gulf, and on all the Atlantic coasts, is owing to their presence. There is a mutual convenience in the trading of the American fleet in the Gulf and along the shore. There is really a great benefit derived by the inhabit- ants by this trade, and the absence of the American fleet makes a decay in business that is universally felt. The mackerel fishery at the best is a very uncertain business, and the causes of their being plenty or scarce are beyond the computation of any man. And there is no such thing as making a safe estimate of value from One year to another, and all calculations based on so-called certainties as to where the mackerel will be this year, or next, are chimerical. I have been master of the following vessels:—Golden Eagle, Farragut, Sea Foam, Falcon. ** CHARLES F. CARTER. COMMONWIEALTEI OF MASSACEIUSETTS. GLOUCESTER, Aug. 22th, 1877. COUNTY OF ESSEX SS. * . - Then personally appeared the above names Charles F. Carter and made oath, that all the above statements by him subscribed are true to the best of his knowledge and belief. Before me, DAVID W. LOW, (L. S.) Notary Public. No. 244. I, Winthrop Thurston, of Rockport, Mass., on oath, depose and say, that I have been accustomed to reside at Grand Manan, N. B., every Summer for the past fifteen years, and am personally cognisant With the mode and manner by which American vessels obtain their bait, which is done to great extent; and they uniformly buy their herring for bait 3312 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. of the inhabitants, paying the cash. Therefore, this custom is of great advantage to the inhabitants, who are very desirous of securing this trade. l WINTEIROP TEHURSTON. CUSTOM Hous E, GLOUCESTER, } - Oct. 3, 1877. Personally appeared the above named Winthrop Thurston, who made oath, that the above statement subscribed by him is true, before me, < ADDISON CARTER, I)eputy Collector of Customs and Justice of the Peace. No. 245. I, James A. Colson, of Gloucester, Mass., on oath, depose and say, that I have been engaged in fishing for the past six years, and for the past 3 years in the Bank fishery. Have been one of the crew of the fol- lowing vessels, all of Gloucester, which vessels have been into Grand Manan or vicinity for bait:-Schr. D. D. Geyer, Schr. Schuyler Colfaa, Schr. George S. Boutwell, Schr. Hyperion. Five or six times I have been there, and have usually taken about 50 bbls. of herring at each baiting, paying, therefor, from $1 to $2 per barrel. Have never caught any her- ring, but have uniformly bought them. Have never known any Ameri- can vessel to catch their herring. - JAMES A. COLSON. . CUSTOM Hous E, GLOUCESTER, Oct. 2, 1877. } Personally appeared the above named James A. Colson, who sub- scribed, and made oath, that the above statement is true. . (Seal). } --- ADDISON CARTER, º Leputy Collector and Justice of the Peace. No. 246. Benry G. Coas, of Gloucester, Mass., on oath, depose and say that, was born in Gloucester, am thirty-six years of age, am now master of schr. John S. McQuin, of Gloucester, have been master for nine years of the schr. Charles H. Hildreth, of said Gloucester, have been in Gulf of St. Lawrence seven years of that time mackereling; 1867 I was in the Bay the whole season, took 200 bbls in all, caught them off Bradley and Bonaventure, caught none of them within 3 miles of the shore; in 1868, was in the Bay, and caught 220 bbls on the first trip, (the second trip we caught only 6 bbls)—I caught the 220 bbls about 8 miles from shore off Muscow, none within 3 miles; in 1869, was in the Bay of St. Law- rence, was there the whole season, and caught 130 bbls mackerel, caught them all over the Gulf, not 10 bbls, however, were caught within three miles of the shore; in 1870, was not in the Bay, went on Georges Eank until August, then went off our own shore mackereling, and caught 375 bbls on coast of Maine, Middle Bank, and off Cape Cod, we caught them in 4 trips—the quality of these mackerel was very good, and we got twice as much for them as for Bay mackerel, and we made, a good year's work; in 1871, I was engaged in fishing on Georges Bank the whole year; in 1872, was in the Gulf of St. Law- rence for mackerel, 2 trips, and caught 270 bbls the first trip, and 240 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3313 bbls the second trip, caught them all but 30 bbls at Madeline Islands, (both trips), the 30 bbls we caught around the Island of P. E., about half of these 30 bbls. I caught within 3 miles of the shore—we got for these mackerel $13 per bbl., and were all mostly No. 1s, our shore mack- erel were worth then, I recollect, $20 for ones; in 1874, was in the Gulf of St. Lawrence for mackerel, and caught 260 bbls. the first trip, and 220 bbls on the second trip (sea bbls.), the first trip we caught off P. E. Island, and should judge that we caught half of them within 3 miles of the shore—the second trip we caught 75 bbls. at Madeline Island, and the rest at P. E. Island, 6 or 8 miles from the shore, (none within 3 miles); in 1875, was in the Bay of St. Lawrence, and caught 175 bbls, all of which were caught within 3 miles of shore at Madeline Islands, and was all our season's work; in 1876, was at Georges all the year. All the above years I have been master ofther schr Charles H. Hil- dreth—this year, 1877, I have been master of the schr John S. McQuin, and have just returned from the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and off our own shore, with 107 barrels of mackerel, 3 barrels of which we caught in the Bay, after being there a week, trying for mackerel, off Cape George, P. E. I., etc., caught 104 of the 107 off the coast of Maine, for which we got $9.50, the 3 barrels caught in the Bay sold for $10 per bbl. In the winter time, I have been accustomed to go to Grand Manan for herring, have been there for last seven winters, with exception of 1873, when I was at Newfoundland for herring, generally making two trips to Grand Manan. I have always bought my herring, paying the cash at from 50 to 75 cents per 100—last year, for my two trips, I paid $1,875, for I averaged about $1000 for each cargo. All of the herring brought from Grand Manan by the Americans have been bought of the inhabitants, have never known anything to the con- trary in my experience. In my trip to Newfoundland, in 1873, I was in the Membrino Chief, we bought 2200 barrels of herring, for which we gave $2200, gold; never knew of any American vessels to get herring at Newfoundland, except by buying them of the inhabitants, they being always very anxious to sell to you, and the inhabitants depend on this traffic with Americans as the principal means of support, and must be of incalculable advantage to them. * - EHENRY G. COAS. * GLOUCESTER, Oct. 2d, 1877. Personally appeared the above named Henry G. Coas, who subscribed, and made oath, that the foregoing statement is true, before me, (Seal). - ADDISON CARTER, Justice of the Peace, and Special Deputy Collector of Customs. ' No. 247. I, Joseph J. Tupper, of Gloucester, Mass., on oath depose and say, that I was born in Liverpool, N. S., am thirty-seven years of age, have been fishing over twenty years, am now master of schooner Madawaska Maid, of Gloucester, and have been master of said vessel for the past nine years; have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence mackereling, with excep- tion of the past three years, every season. The past three years have been engaged in fishing on the American shore, seining for mackerel during the summers, and in the past seven winters have been to New Brunswick for herring. I have now just returned from the Gulf of St. Lawrence on a mackerel voyage,_sailing from Gloucester about the 8th of August, and seined 30 barrels of pogie slivers for bait, on the coast 208 F. 3314 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. of Maine,—arrived at Prince Edward Island about the 18th of August, having tried unsuccessfully at Margaree; and not finding mackerel at Brince Edward Island, I went to the Magdalen Islands, and tried hard for one week, with pleasant weather, catching only 10 barrels altogether. Spoke many vessels, both American and British, all telling the same story, “that mackerel was very scarce.” Being dissatisfied with the prospect, I sailed for home, with a number of others equally disgusted. I omitted to state that previous to going to the Gulf of St. Lawrence, I caught thirty-five barrels of shore mackerel off Block Island, which I sold for $24 per barrel; the 10 barrels of Bay mackerel I sold for $13 per barrel, which is one dollar more than the regular price, as they gave me one dollar more for them, in order to secure the shore mackerel. I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence mackereling thirteen seasons, and averaged 300 barrels each year; and I have no hesitation in saying, that not one-tenth part were caught within three miles from the shore, except those I caught at Magdalen Islands. I did not take a license during the years of exclusion. I never knew or heard of any injury to any shore boats by the American fleet, and this very trip I have given away to these boats bait, which they solicit. I never heard that mackerel clean- ings were injurious in any way to the fishery; on the contrary, we often grind it with the other bait. I have known of times when I have been solicited by farmers in St. Mary's Bay to save my offal for them, and they would send a boat for it, they wanting it for their farms as a fer- tilizer, and not on account of any injury to the fishery by being thrown overboard. The reason I did not take out a license during the years of exclusion was because I did not fish within the three-mile limit, and therefore was of no Value to me. The cost of my late fishing was as fallows:— Charter of my Vessel, per month, $250 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . As e º e s tº $250 13 Men at $30 per month . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 390 Captain's Wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Seine and Boat, use of. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sº tº ºr e º ſº º º º ve 100 Outfits, Provisions, Bbls. Salt Bait . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 Insurance, Packing and Inspection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 $1,265 RECEIPTS. 35 Bbls. Block Island Mackerel, a $24....................... $840 10 “ taken in Gulf of St. Lawrence (a) $13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 $970 RECAPITULATION. Cost of Voyage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *As ºf we we & © tº º tº gº . $1,265 Receipts from Voyage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Amount lost by Voyage --- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $295 During the winters for the past seven years, I have been to New Brunswick for herring, averaging 2 trips during the winter. I have uniformly bought my herring, paying the cash, and have paid on an average, $2500 a year, with the exception of last winter, when I made three trips, and paid them $3600. I usually pay from thirty-five to ninety cents per hundred, taking 500 to the barrel. The herring fisher- men there have often told me that they could not realize 12 cents per AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3315 100, if it were not for the American vessels coming for them, and they have no other market for them to any extent. While I was engaged in the Bay fishing, my highest stock was $4,000 for any one season, while my lowest was $2,000. On this American shore, the highest stock I ever made was $10,000 for any one season, and my lowest, including this year, so far, including the 12 barrels caught in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, is $3500. I went one trip to Newfoundland for salt herring, in, I think, 1869, and also one trip in 1870, both of which trips we bought our herring, paying one dollar in gold per barrel. The first voyage, we bought 850 barrels, and the second voyage, we paid for 2,000 barrels. I never knew of any American vessels catching herring in nets or Seines at New- foundland or New Brunswick. JOSEPH J. TUPPER, Master of Schr. Madawaska Maid. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, COUNTY OF EssEx, SS. GLOUGESTER, Sept. 3d, 1877 Then personally appeared the above named Joseph J. Tupper, and made Oath, that all the above statements by him subscribed, are true, before me, - DAVID W. LOW. º Notary Public. No. 248. I, Hanson B. Joyce, of Swan's Island, Maine, on oath, depose and say, that I am Master of Schooner Alice, of Portland, have been engaged in the Fisheries eighteen years, and have been master for the last seven years—have been master of the Alice the past two years—have been mackereling the whole of this season, first going South on our shore up to the 20th June, and caught 900 barrels, and netted $4,000. I went into the Bay of St. Lawrence, arriving at Canso, July 10th, and fished midway between Cape George and Port Hood, and caught in two days 140 bbls. with Seine not less than five miles from the shore, and one day fished off the north-end of P. E. Island, and caught 30 bbls. With Seine, catching them not less than seven miles from the shore. We then fished between Cape George and P. E. Island, and about the east end of the Island, and caught 37 bbls. altogether, one-half of these 37 With Seine, and not any within four miles from the shore. After the pros- pect not being favorable enough, we started for home and arrived Aug. 14th, having been in the Bay about a month, and getting what packed out, 188 bbls., which sold for $1,917. We were gone, considering the going and coming, a month and a-half, and the owners of the vessel re- ceived three hundred and forty-two dollars, which is less than I would be Willing to charter the vessel for that length of time at this season of the year by $200. After packing out from the Bay, went mackereling on this (the American) shore, and caught up to this time, 365 barrels, which will average at least $9 per barrel, $3,285. Having caught, dur- ing the whole season, on this shore, 1,265 barrels, and in the Bay 207. (The above are sea-barrels). A I chartered the schr. G. W. Reed, in the Winter of 1872, and went into Grand Manan, or rather Point Lepreau, N. B., for herring, and loaded her with 150,000 frozen herring, for which I paid $375. At this time, there were at least 30 sail of American vessels at this place, and in the vicinity, engaged in the same business, and they all invariably bought 3316 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. their herring. I have never known of but four instances in which they attempted to catch them. . In the season of 1868 and 1869, I was engaged in a small vessel of 20 tons for about a month of each season, in catching herring, on the coast of Maine, and caught 250 barrels each season. This business would be very extensive, were it profitable enough to induce the inhabitants to engage in it, as the herring are very numerous on the shore of Maine. and Massachusetts, so much so, that they interfere with our mackerel fishing considerably. HANSON B. JOY CE, Master of Schr. Alice. GLOUCESTER, Oct. 10, 1877. Personally appeared the above named Hanson B. Joyce, master of the Schr. Alice, who made oath, that the above statement is true, before me, (L. S). ADDISON CARTER, Justice of the Peace, and Special Deputy Collector of Customs. No. 249. GLOUCESTER, MASS., Oct. 15, 1877. I certify that I have this day personally visited the several firms enumerated below and have ascertained from them and their books the vessels belonging to Gloucester engaged in the mackerel fishery that have arrived from the Bay of St. Lawrence or British waters, during the year and up to this date (Oct. 15th, 1877) and the number of barrels of mackerel caught by each while in the Bay, or British waters, where they were caught, whether within three miles of the shore, and the amount of money realized from the sale of said mackerel. I also certify that the following list of vessels are all the vessels belonging to Glou- cester engaged in the mackerel fishery that have as yet returned from the Bay of St. Lawrence or British waters. ADDISON CARTER, Spec. Dep. Collector for District of Gloucester. NAMELY : Sidney Friend & Bro.—Sch. Hyperion, packed out 2154 barrels; sold for $2400—supposed to be caught off East Point, P. E. I. Sch. J. J. Clark packed 2294 barrels; sold for $2250—don't know where caught. Leonard Walen–Sch. Martha C., packed 159 barrels; sold for $1719– caught about one-half of them at Madeline Islands, one-third off Mar- garee, one-sixth up north. •. Dennis and Ayer—Sch. Mary Fernald, packed out 130 barrels; not sold but will average $15; total $1950—don’t know where caught. Wonson Brothers—Sch. Madawaska Maid, packed 9 barrels; averaging $16 per barrel, caught at Madeline Islands. Sch. John S. McQuinn, caught no mackerel in the Bay. - James G. Tarr & Bro.—Sch. Amos Cutter, packed 150 barrels—$1950; caught off St. George Bay. Sch. Flash, packed 150 barrels—$2,100; . caught at Madeline Islands all but 20 barrels, caught at St. George Bay. Harvey Knowlton—Sch. Edward A., Horton, packed 186 barrels— $2534.50; caught off West Cape; about 20 barrels supposed to be caught inside of 3 miles. º - George Dennis & Co.—Sch. Helen M. Dennis, packed 91 barrels, not sold; average $13 per barrel; caught off Madeline Islands. Sch. Fred P. AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3317 Frye, caught nothing in the Bay. Sch. Seth Stockbridge, 80 barrels, averaging $10 per barrel; don't know where caught. Rowe & Jordan–Schr. Ellen M. Crosby, packed 8 barrels, at $10–$80. Schr. Golden Hind, packed 70; not sold; where caught not known. John Pew & Son—Schr. Eastern Queen, packed 210 barrels—32,145; Where caught not known. -- Samuel Lane—Schr. Moses Adams, packed 85 barrels, average at $11— $935; where caught not known. Leighton & Co.—Schr. Falcon, packed 107; barrels—$1,250.93; caught at Madeline Islands—40 barrels at East Point. $ Joseph Friend—Schr. William S. Baker, packed 10 barrels, at $11– 110. McKenzie, Hardy & Co.—Schr. Vidette, packed 133 barrels—$1,629.25; Caught principally at Madeline Islands. f D.C. & EI. Babson—Schr. Marion Grimes, packed 137 barrels—$1,635; Caught at Madeline Islands. Clark & Somes—Schr. Frederic Gerring, Jr., packed 343 barrels— $3,531; don't know where caught—vessel is away. Benj. Haskell & Son—Schr. Colorado, pickled 85 barrels—$860; caught off Rustico—about quarter within 3 miles of shore. James Mansfield & Son—Schr. William A. Pew, packed 140 barrels— $1,800.75; not known where caught—vessel out. John H. Gale—Schr. Alice M. Lewis, packed out 1994 barrels—sold for $2,476; seined 10 miles off the Island. I certify that the foregoing statement is true. * ADDISON CARTER, Spec. Dy. Collector. James G. Tarr & Bro.—Schr. Davy Crocket, Capt. Charles Osier, will pack out 218 barrels mackerel, caught one-half at Madeline Islands, and one-half off Prince Edward Island; did not catch one-eighth of whole amount within the three-mile limit. The foregoing is the statement of Capt. Charles Osier. (Arrived the 16th Oct., 1877.) Pettingell & Cunningham—Schr. David M. Hilton, Capt. Daniels, with 200 sea-barrels of mackerel, from the Bay; caught 90 barrels at Madeline Islands, and 110 barrels off Prince Edward Island; not more than 50 barrels of the whole were caught within three miles of the shore. The foregoing is a statement of Capt. Daniels. Cunningham & Thompson—Schr. Gwendolen, Capt. William T. Gray, arrived from Bay of St. Lawrence on the 16th inst. Packed 225 bar- rels mackerel, one-third of which were number ones, the remainder num- ber twos. About one-half were caught at Madeline Islands, the re- mainder off and around P. E. Island; not more than one-eighth were caught within the three-mile limit. This is the statement of Mr. Thomp- Son, of the above firm. Henry Friend, owner—Schr. David J. Adams, Capt. Danl. Rackliff, from Bay of St. Lawrence, arrived on the 18th inst. (having been in the Bay over two months), with 50 barrels of mackerel,-one-third ones, and the rest twos; 40 barrels were caught around P. E. Island, and 10 bar- º caught near Port Hood; nearly all caught within three miles of the SI) OTé. CUSTOM HousB, GLOUCESTER, Oct. 19, 1877. I certify that the foregoing statement concerning schooners David Crockett, David M. Hilton, Gwendolen, and David J. Adams, have been reported to me as true, by the master or owner of the said vessel; and that these, together with a former certified list, sent to Capt. F. J. Babson. 3318 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. at Halifax, are all the vessels belonging to Gloucester that have arrived from the Bay of St. Lawrence with mackerel this season, up to the even- ing of Oct. 19, 1877. * (L. S.) ADDISON CARTER. Dy. Collector. No. 250. I, Joseph McLean, a naturalized citizen of the United States, now residing at Cape Negro, in the Province of Nova Scotia, being duly sworn, do depose and say, that I am the Captain of the schooner Cham- pion, of Gloucester, in the State of Massachusetts, and that I have been engaged in fishing for mackerel in the Gulf of St. Lawrence since the 17th of August, 1877; and I came out of the Gulf the 20th of October. That during that time, my vessel took seventy sea-barrels of mackerel; that I came into the Harbour of Halifax last evening for shelter, and expect to leave this morning. As nearly as I can learn, the other Vessels in the Bay did not average more than half a trip, and the mackerel fish- ery in the Gulf for the present year, as regards the United States, has been a complete failure. I have heard of two vessels only, which took three hundred barrels—the George S. Low, and the Etta Gott. I also heard that the Herbert M. Rogers took two hundred, and the Ellen M. Crosby six barrels—the William S. Baker, three barrels. All these which I have named have left the Bay, except the Etta Gott. JOSEPH MCLEAN. Sworn at Halifax, this 23d day of October, A. D., 1877, before me, L. W. DES BARRES. Notary Public, No. 251. Statement of the number of barrels of mackerel inspected by A. E. Goodwin, Deputy Inspector of Fish, Port of Newburyport, Mass., dur- ing the years 1865, 1866, 1867, 1868, 1869, and 1870,- American British WaterS. WaterS. Date. # o, ‘5 $– O2 3? 3? #3 5 § zº zº *----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,500 5, 200 *----------------------------------------------------------------------------. 2,045 5,405 *----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3,918 , 694 *----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2,561 1,969 *----------------------------------------------------------------------------. , 272 1,930 1870----------------------------------------------------------------------------. 4, 262 1,806 17, 558 20, 004 A. E. GOODWIN. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS. COUNTY OF ESSEX, SS. Before mie, E. F. Bartlett, a Notary Public, within and for said County of Essex, duly commismissioned and qualified, personally came the above named A. E. Goodwin, well known to me as an Inspector of Fish, and Whom I believe to be a man of truth and veracity, and subscribed the AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3319 foregoing statement, and made oath that the same was true and correct to his best knowledge and belief. - Witness my hand and Notarial Seal at Newburyport, in said County of Essex, this Twenty-Fourth day of September, A. D., 1877. - |L. S.] * E. F. BARTLETT, Notary Public. No. 252. Statement of the Number of Barrels of Mackerel Inspected by George D. Thurlow, Inspector of Fish, for the Port of Newburyport, Mass., dur- ing the years 1873, 1874, 1875, 1876: n American British Waters. WaterS. Date. ‘5 O2 #4 $– t- $– 3? 3? ää ă ă ** ** 1873----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 948 2, 130 1874--------------------------------------------------4-------------------------- 2,687 2, 371 1875. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------. 1, 347 843 1876.---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2,005 |. --------- 6,987 5,344 GEORGE D. TEIUBLOW. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, STATE OF MASSACEIUSETTS, County of EssEx, SS. Before me, E. F. Bartlett, Notary Public, duly commissioned and Qualified, personally appeared the above named George D. Thurlow, per- sonally known to be an inspector of fish, and whom I believe to be a man of truth and veracity, and made oath that the foregoing statement ; him subscribed was true and correct, to his best knowledge and elief. - - Witness my hand and Notarial Seal, this Twenty-Fourth day of Sep- tember, A. D., 1877. (L. S.) E. F. BARTLETT. Notary Public. No. 253. --- * The following is a statement of the number of barrels of herring bought by the several firms in 'Gloucester during the year 1876; said herring having been caught by the inhabitants on the shores of the United States:— Number of Barrels. Name of Firm. 15,733 D. C. & EI. Babson. 7, 500 Gloucester Fish Co. 450 James H. Stetson. 2,000 Geo. P. Trigg & Co. 2,500 Geo. Perkins. 1,500 Simon Merchant. 6,000 Broctor, Trask & Co., 1,492 John Pew & Son. 700 Clark & Somes. 37,975 3320 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. GLOUCESTER, Oct. 15, 1877. I certify that the above figures are a true statement of the firms above enumerated, as stated to me by them. BENJ. F. COOK, r Inspector of Ou ,toms. No. 254. AUGUST 7, 1877. Arrived at Gloucester British schooner Harriet, Capt. E. R. Perry, from Shelburne, N. S. - British schooner Gertie, from Lockeport, N. S., arrived May 5th and July 11th, 1877. British schooner Avon, from fishing, arrived May 24th, June 11th, and July 23rd, 1877. - I certify that the British schooner Harriet and Gertie arrived at this IPort as above stated, and fitted for seining. Also, that the schooner (British) Avon, has been engaged in fishing on this coast, and Selling the fish at this place since May 5th, 1877. BENJ. F. BLATCHFORD, Boarding Officer, Gloucester, Mass. No. 255. GLOUCESTER, Sept. 10, 1877. I, Thomas E. Roberts, Master of the British schooner M. E. McLean, on oath do depose and say that I was born in Guysborough, Nova Scotia, am 31 years of age, have been engaged in freighting from Nova Scotia to Boston 4 years. I have brought up this trip 620 bbls of mackerel, 503 of these are English mackerel. I get 50 cents per barrel freight from Canso to Boston. Last trip before this, I bought herring at 50 cents per barrel. I know that the expense on a barrel of mackerel or herring brought by steamer is at least one dollar per barrel to Gloucester. I have brought in the last four years 700 barrels of American mackerel. The freight has been about the same. It is the universal fact, that one dollar is no more than a fair freight. I was part owner, and master of the Schr. Dusky Lake, of Canso. I was in the Gulf of St. Lawrence mackereling in 1869—got 180 bbls. in four weeks; and not doing so well as I ought to, I abandoned this fish- ery, and went onto the ocean Banks for fish. I have never been mack- ereling since, but I now go freighting. º TEHOMAS ROBERTS. *~ COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, County of EssEx, SS. GLOUCESTER, Sept. 10th, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named Thomas Boberts, and made oath that the above statements by him subscribed are true, before me, T) AVID W. LOW Nootary Public. No. 256. I, J. Warren Wonson, of Gloucester, in the County of Essex, State of Massachusetts, on oath, depose and say, that I was part owner and agent of Schr. Tragabig2anda, of Gloucester, of which vessel William Molloy was master, that in the season of 1876 said vessel made only one trip to the Grand Banks for cod-fish, the first trip said vessel was fitted for sea March 21st, 1876, and returned Aug. 23rd, 1876, having been AWARD OF THE FISEHERY COMMISSION. 3321 absent 4 months and 28 days. Said vessel's trip was weighed off, and aCCounted for as follows:– 65,300 lbs Large Cod, (a) 2.Éc $1,632. 50 7,440 “ Small “ (a) 14 95. 00 110 Gals. Oil (2) 45 49, 50 108 £4 4% (2) 50 * 54, 00 20 46 (£ (a) 40 8. O0 Fish sold by master, 239, 68 620 lbs, Flitched Halibut, (2) 20., 12. 40 * $2,091.08 Less Stock Expenses, 296. 31. 2)1,794, 77 Vessels, 897. 384 Crew, 897. 384 * $1,794. 77 Stock Expenses as follows:— Bait, $230.20 Ice, 11,60 Water, 3.20 Port Charges, 38.81 Towing, 8.00 6 Barrels, 4.50 296.3 12)897.38 Crew's Share, 74.78 each for 4 month and 28 days. I further depose, and say, that on her second trip, she went to the Western. Bank and Cape Sable. Sailed on or about the 28th day of August, and returned Nov. 24th—absent about 2 months and 26 days. She weighed off as follows:— 21,743 lbs Large Cod, 2 3 c $652.29 3,625 “ Small “ (a) 14 - 54,37 Fish sold by Master in Prospect, 280.50 220 Gals. Slivers, (2) 15c., 33.00 $1,020.16 Stock Expenses, 256.43 2)763.73 381.86% 381.86% $763.73 Stock Expenses as follows:— Bait, $184. 22 Içe, 47. 55 Water, - 7. 22 Custom House, 4. 46 Pilot, 8. 88 Telegram, 1. 10 Towing, 3.00 $256. 43 Crew’s Share, (12 men), for 2 months and 26 days, $31,82. 3322 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. I further depose and say, that said schr. Tragabig2dnda did not pay her running expenses during the year 1876 by Two Thousand dollars. That said Molloy was discharged from our employ as being entirely untrustworthy, and to the best of my belief, is now a resident of New- foundland, where he came from. In presence of CYRUS STORY.) . J. WARREN WONSON. I, Joseph Adams, a resident of Gloucester, County of Essex, State of Massachusetts, on oath depose and say, that I was one of the crew of Schr. Tragabig2anda, of Gloucester, in 1876, on her second trip to the Banks. That we fished on the Western Banks and off Cape Sable, and that said schooner did not go near Newfoundland. All her fresh bait having been bought at Shelburne and Prospect, Nova Scotia. his * JOSEPH x ADAMS. mark. (In presence of FRANK E. SMOTEIER & CYRUS STORY.) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, COMMON WEALTH OF MAS. * SACEIUSETTS, COUNTY OF ESSEX SS. CITY OF GLOUCESTER. JKnow all men by these present,-that on this twentieth day of Octo- ber, A. D., 1877, before me, Cyrus Story, a Notary Public, duly appointed and sworn in and for the County of Essex, aforesaid, personally appeared J. Warren Wonson and Joseph Adams, before named, who made oath to the truth of the foregoing statements by them signed. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial Seal, the day and year last above written. (L. S.) CYRUS STORY, Notary Public. No. 257. GLOUCESTER, Sept. 3, 1877. I, Charles Martin, Master of the schr Martha C., of Gloucester, do on oath depose and say, that I was born in Halifax, Nova Scotia, am 40 years of age, have been engaged in the fisheries for 30 years. I have just returned from a trip to the Gulf of St. Lawrence for mackerel. I commenced to fit my vessel for this trip July 3rd, 1877, and sailed from Gloucester the 9th, arrived in the Bay on the 17th ; took my bait on the coast of Maine. Took my first mackerel in Antigonish Bay, about 15 barrels on the hook, within three miles of the shore. We fished between Cape George and East Point, we went around Prince Edward Island, could not find any mackerel; tried in the middle of the Bay, between Cape George and East Point again ; caught 80 barrels on the hook, from six to eight miles from shore. Afterward went to Margaree and Chittigong; took 80 barrels there, close into the shore. This was all we got. We then cruised all around the Island and up off Cape North, and did not find any mackerel. We then went to Pirate Cove and refitted, and then went into the Bay again, and found no mackerel, neither could I find any vessel that had seen any. I got entirely dis- couraged and left the Bay, and came up on the Nova Scotia shore and found no prospect of mackerel there, and came home; found no vessels doing anything. I arrived home the 1st of September. I packed out 40 barrels number ones, and 110 barrels of number twos, and 10 bar- rels threes. My mackerel were worth $1,920.00. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3323 My vessel is a new, first-class one, 79 tons. I carried a Seine-boat and Seine. The charter of my vessel is worth $250 per month, $500 00 Wages of 14 men, at $30 per month, 840 00 Captain's Wages, two months, 140 00 Outfits, 600 00 Packing and inspection, 120 00 Insurance, * 100 00 Use of seine and boat, 150 00 Cost of trip, * $2,450 00 Receipts—160 barrels mackerel, at $12, $1,920 00 LOSS, $530 00 I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence 14 seasons for mackerel. I was there in 1875, and brought home 70 barrels; was gone over two months. The mackerel fishery in the bay is a failure, compared with former years. The mackerel do not stay there as formerly. I do think that the large amount of bait, thrown by American vessels, formerly kept the mackerel in the Bay. There is no feed at all for the mackerel in the Bay now. I have seen no brit or shrimp there this year. Some of the mackerel I took had small smelt in them ; this is unusual. I never saw any smelt in mackerel in the Bay before. I have never caught many mackerel inshore, except at the Magdalen Islands. I have caught more inshore this trip than any I have been. My best judgment, from my experience, as fair and candid, is, that not more than one-sixth of the mackerel taken by American vessels, are taken within three miles of the shore. a I have taken many whole trips without going inside of five miles. When a large fleet of vessels are throwing bait, they can keep the mack- erel off shore five miles without any trouble. I have trans-shipped my fare of mackerel once, from Canso. The ex- pense, landed in Gloucester, was one dollar per barrel. I never heard of boats being injured, nor any complaint whatever. Never heard or knew of mackerel gurry hurting the fisheries; in dressing mackerel the fish will follow the vessel to get the gurry thrown over. I have seined off the American shore for mackerel two seasons. The American shore mackerel are much better than the Bay mackerel in Quality and price. I have stocked as high as $7,000 in one season in the Bay, eight years ago. My lowest stock for one season in the Bay was $600. An American vessel, as they are now fitted, must stock $5,000 in the Bay, to pay her bills. I have been the two last winters to Newfoundland for herring. Bought all my herring of the people on shore. Paid on an average eight shillings per barrel, or $1.60; paid for some $2. There is no Way that the people there can realize so much for their herring as this sale to American vessels. The American trade there for herring h the chief Support of the people, and is a source of great profit to them. I have been master of the schooners Quickstep, Belvidere, Seaman's Pride, Enterprise, D. A. Bunham, Fred. Gerring, Charlotte Augusta, Mary B. Daniels, Joseph Chandler, Martha C. CELARLES MARTIN. 3324 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, “County OF Essex, SS. GLOUGESTER, Sept. 3d, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named Charles Martin, and made oath, that all the statements by him above made, are true to the best of this knowledge and belief, before me, DAVID W. LOW. (L. S.) . Notary Public. No. 258. * I, William Parsons, 2nd, senior member of the firm of William Par- sons 2nd & Co., on oath depose and say, that I am part owner and fitter, with others of said firm, of the schooner Pescadore (Pescador); that I have examined the books of said firm and find that James Howlett made two trips in said schooner, in the year 1867; that said schooner packed out 463; barrels of mackerel; that the shares of said vessel was $2,701; that said Howlett's shares was $224,37. I further depose and say that I have also examined the books of said firm in regard to Daniel McPhee, in schooner Messina, and find his name as one of the crew, in 1865 only, he not having been in her in 1863. Said schooner packed out in 1865, when said McPhee was in her, two hundred and sixty barrels of mackerel (260 bbls.), his share amounting to $98.21; the vessels' share was $1,745.19. - .# WM. PARSONS 2ND. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, County of EssEx ss. GLOUCESTER, Sept. 14, 1877. Subscribed and sworn to by above named William Parsons 2nd, before me, - DAVID W. LOW, (L. S.) Notary Public. No. 259. I, Solomon Jacobs, of Gloucester, Mass., on oath, depose and say, that I am Master of the Schr. Moses Adams, of Gloucester, and have just arrived from a mackerel voyage to the Gulf of St. Lawrence, having caught 190 bbls. of mackerel on the trip, one-third of them we caught on Bank Orphan, the rest at different places, and about 20 barrels within the three mile limit. I am very sure that the number caught within three mile limit will not exceed 25 barrels. I should judge that 150 of the 190 bbls. are number ones, as they are good-sized mackerel, having caught the most of them well up north in the Gulf—have not yet sold, but expect to get $16 for 1's, $10.50, and $7.00 for them. I have been two months on the trip. The cost of the trip is as follows:— Charter, (a) $500 per Month . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,000 Provisions, &c., - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . 300 Barrels, Inspection, &c., (2) $1.75 . . . . . . . 330 Captain's Commissions, (a) 4.00 per cwt. 106 - - $1,736.00 “Owner's Profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,278.25 gºmºmº $457. 75 lost by the voyage. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3.325, 150 bbls No. 1s (a) $16.00. . . . . $2,400.00 25 “ “ 2s (a) 10.50. . . . . 262. 50 - $2,662. 50 Captain's Commissions . . . . . . 106. 0ſ) $2,556.50 Crew’s Half . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, 278. 25 Owner's Share . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,278.25 This is my first trip to the Bay for mackereling, and I think it will be: the last, and would have done a great deal better on our own shore. I have, for the five years previous, fished on our own shore, and always done a great deal better than I have this year. In the year 1872, I was. master of the sch’r Sabine, and fished off this shore, starting late in the Season, and caught 650 bbls., which sold for $18 and $20 per barrel;. and in 1873, I was master of the schooner S. R. Lane, of Gloucester, and caught 1,600 barrels off this shore (the American); in 1874, I was master of same vessel, and caught 1,200 barrels, averaging $10 a barrel;. in 1875, I was master of same vessel, and caught 1,800 barrels of mack- erel off the American shore, and stocked $11,000. I would state that previous to going into the Bay this year, I was mackereling on this shore, and caught 800 bbls., for which we stocked. $5,200. SOLOMON JACOBS, - Master of Schr. Moses Adams. CUSTOM House, GLOUCESTER, } - Oct. 4th, 1877. Personally appeared the above named Solomon Jacobs, master of Schr. Moses Adams, who subscribed, and made oath, that the above statement is true, before me, ADDISON CARTER, Special Deputy Collector and Justice of the Peace. NO. 260. I, Albian K. Pierce of Gloucester, Mass., on oath depose and say that I am master of schooner Wm. S. Baker of Gloucester, and have been. engaged in mackereling during this season, and fished off the American Shore the first two months of the season, and caught 350 barrels, by which we stocked $1,950. From dispatches and favorable reports I. was induced to go to the Bay of St. Lawrence, and sailed for Bay Chaleur the 18th July, and was in the Bay 14 days, and tried for mack- erel all the way from P. E. Island to Gaspe and other places, inshore and out, and caught three barrels only. I then came home and fished On the coost of Maine, and caught 160 barrels at that place, from which, the me, stock amounted to $1,455. I consider in my trip to the Bay this year I lost $2,000. Last year, 1876 I was master of the same ves- Sel, and fished on the American coast, and caught 1,420 barrels, and Stocked $11,000 net. In 1875 I was master of the same vessel. I fished on this shore and landed 1,000 barrels of mackerel up to middle of July;. and on the 16th July we started for the Bay and tried hard at P. E. Island and Madeline Islands for ten days, but finding no mackerel of any consequence, we started for home, having caught nine barrels of No. 2's. 3326 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. during all the time in the Bay. We then fished on the American shore and caught 600 barrels, making 1,600 barrels of good mackerel caught on this shore during the year, from which we stocked $13,300. In 1874 I was master of the same vessel, and fished for mackerel during the season on this (the American) shore, and caught over 1,100 barrels, from which we stocked $9,000. Previous to 1874, I had been in the habit of going to the Bay mackereling, and some years we did well and others poorly. Over one-half of all the mackerel caught there these years were caught off Madeline Islands, and, excepting at Madeline Islands, not one-tenth part were caught within the three-mile limit. I have been employed during the winter for the past seven years in going to Newfoundland after herring, and for the past three winters I loaded ten vessels at that place. I hired the inhabitants to fish for us, and left with the inhabitants $24,000, for 20,300 barrels of herring, loaded into the ten vessels which I superintended. During the last two winters the owners of this enterprise have lost $8,000 by the prosecu- tion of this business. Previous to the last three winters I was accus- tomed to go there for herring for myself alone, and was there four winters in succession, and always got a cargo, paying $1 per barrel for them. This business is very extensive and of great importance to the inhabitants. I have seen at one time over twenty sail of American vessels there buy herring, and all of them buy their herring; and have never known an American vessel to catch their herring at this place, always invariably buying them of the inhabitants. At Boone Bay, the inhabitants rely almost entirely upon this trade with our ves- sels, and without which they would be very destitute. In the winter of 1876, when I was there, the herring were very scarce,—almost a failure, —and occasioned great destitution and suffering among the inhabitants of Boone Bay; so much so, that I was obliged to give away five barrels of flour to them,-and Mr. Curling, minister at that place, bought of me as many more, and other stores, which he distributed among the poor people. ALBION EC. PIERCE. GLOUCESTER, Oct. 5, 1877. Personally appeared the above named Albion K. Pierce, who made oath that the above statement, by him subscribed, is true, before me.' ADDISON CARTER, Justice of the Peace, Spec. Dep. Collector of District of Gloucester. No. 260 A. GLou CESTER, Sept. 17, 1877. "I, William Elwell, master of the schr, Isabella, born in Gloucester, have been engaged in the fisheries 20 years. I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence 12 seasons for mackerel. My best stock in the Bay Was $2000, my poorest $1200. I left off going there 8 years ago, because I could do so much better on the American coast. I have fished for mack- erel on the American coast the past 8 years—5 years using a Seine. My best stock mackereling on the American coast was $7,500 for 5 months fishing. - - My poorest stock in any season was $4,500. When in the Gulf of St. Lawrence I took the most of my mackerel at the Magdalens. The American fleet usually fish the most there. I did not get more than one barrel in ten inside of three miles. Mackerel in the Bay when in large bodies or masses are most always off shore from AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3327 6 to 20 miles, and when we find them there we get large decks of them. The mackerel on the American coast are from the rocks to thirty miles Off. I consider the American fishermen are not at all compensated by free fishing within three miles of the British coasts in lieu of the imposed duty of $2 per barrel on British mackerel. WILLIAM ELWELL. GLOUCESTER, MASS., } ESSEX, S. S., Sept. 17, 1877. Personally appeared the above named Wm. Elwell, who subscribed to and made oath that the foregoing statement was true before me. (L. S.) ADDISON CARTER, Justice of the Peace, and Special Deputy Collector of Customs, for District of Gloucester. No. 261. I, Peter Sinclair, master and owner of the American schooner C. B. Manning, was born in the Orkney Islands, am 58 years of age, and have been engaged in the fisheries nearly 50 years. I am now seining off the American shore for mackerel. I have been seven seasons mackereling in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. I have not been there since 1873. The highest stock I ever made in the Gulf of St. Lawrence mackereling was $7,000.00 (1859.) My poorest year I stocked $150.00 (one hundred and fifty dollars), gone six weeks; this was in 1860. Any American vessel, over 50 tons, with 12 or 14 men, must stock at least $5,000 for a full season's work in the Gulf of St. Law. rence mackereling, to pay her bills. Of all the mackerel I have taken in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, not more than one-third were taken within three miles of the shore, including the Magdalen Islands; and the larger the fleet of vessels in the Bay, throwing bait, the longer the mackerel will stop in one place. The action of the mackerel is largely influenced by the movements of the fleet. Four years ago, when I was in the Bay, the mackerel fishery there was a partial failure, and since then the American shore mackereling has been much more successful and profit- able. For the last six years the American shore mackerel have been of much finer quality, and brought better prices than Bay mackerel of the same brand. The mackerel feed on shrimp and a red seed that floats on the water; wherever we find them we usually find mackerel. This food is generally more plenty on the American coast than in the Gulf, and I have found ºre with young mackerel inside of them, having eaten them for food. I never knew that throwing over mackerel cleanings would hurt the live mackerel; on the contrary, I have always noticed the mackerel to fol- low the vessel while we were dressing, and eat all we threw overboard. I never knew of any American vessels interfering with the shore boats in, any Way, except in cases where the boats got blowed off, to pick them up and tow them in, and in some cases to take men from the bottom of the boats that had been upset, and save their lives; and I have often given the boat fishermen bait and also lines and hooks. I do not consider the privilege to fish inshore of any real value whatever, and the duties re- mitted on Canadian fish and mackerel is vastly in excess of compensa- tion for what is of little value to our fishermen. The only advantage gained by the inshore concession is security from annoyance, heretofore 3328 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. practiced by the Canadian marine force, the object of seizure being stimu- lated by one-half of the prize money being divided among the crews of the cutters. The inshore fisheries of the Gulf of St. Lawrence for cod and halibut is a matter belonging to the past. No American fisherman now fishes inshore for either. I have fished out of Gloucester for cod and halibut 27 seasons, and I never took either fish inside of three miles of the English shore. The American fishery now is absolutely and purely a deep-sea fishery for cod and halibut. The first fresh bait bought in Newfoundland by American fishermen was about 22 years ago, and brought to Gloucester to bait the Georges men. It is about 8 or 9 years since the Grand Bankers and Western Bankers began to buy bait at Newfoundland ; for centuries before they had used salt bait and the other bait and refused fish taken on the Banks; they also used to buy bait at St. Peirre. Now they go up For- tune Bay for it; they pay cash for this bait. It costs $150 to a vessel for a Grand Bank fare. The people there have got well off by the sale of this bait; they are rich, and every dollar left there by American vessels is clear gain to them, as there is no other use or market where they would use these herring they sell to American vessels. I have owned and run more than thirty vessels, and in the different branches of the fisheries pursued by American fishermen, I have had as much experience as any person now living; and I know the value of the different fisheries by actual experience in practical fishing, in each department, and the scale of values by actual sales. In the herring trade for the first eleven years, it was profitable to those engaged in it, but for the past eleven years there has been more lost than gained, on a fair average. * I have lost myself $1,500 on one voyage, and $1,100 on another. I never made over one thousand dollars on any one berring voyage. I have known vessel after vessel to throw overboard her cargo of herring in the harbor of Gloucester, and to have given them away in New York for Yù all U11'63, PETER SINCLAIR. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, COUNTY OF ESSEX SS. GLOUGESTER, Sept. 3, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named Peter Sinclair, and made Oath that all the above statements by him subscribed are true, before Iſle 5 DAVID W. LOW, (L. S.) - Notary Public. GLOUCESTER, September 1, 1877. I, Wm. T. Rowe, Master of the schr. B. D. Haskins, of Gloucester, do, on oath, depose and say, that I was born in Gloucester, am 39 years of age, have been engaged in the fisheries 25 years. I have just returned from a trip to Block Island, and the last week, off Monhegan, Maine. § 4. The mackerel taken off Block Island are very large and fat, taking 90 mackerel to a barrel. We set our seine once off Monhegan, and took 20 barrels No. 1s and 2s. We came home to refit and are going immedi- ately to the Eastern shore. There is now a great body of mackerel there, from close into the rocks to 25 miles off. The Maud Muller took 230 bbls in her seine at one haul. The Fairy Queen, of Portland, took 60 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3829 bbls. at one haul. The Volunteer took 100 barrels in 3 hauls. All the vessels the day we left, took all the way from 20 to 60 bbls. The Cor- poral Trim, of Swan's Island, is in with 210 barrels No. 1 and 2 mackerel, taken on the hook. She took from 10 to 15 barrels each day. This is the best prospect we have had this year, and it indicates a good fall catch on our shores. The owners of some of the vessels now in the Bay of St. Lawrence have sent by telegraph for them to come home and go for these shore mackerel. I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence 7 seasons, mackereling. The early trips in the Bay the mackerel were taken offshore, later in the Fall the mackerel were inshore. In 1851, we took all our mackerel inshore, that is, from one mile to ten; in 1854, we never took a mackerel within ten miles of the shore; have not been there since 1854. I have been shore seining for mackerel since, every season. I have shared $241 to a share in six weeks' mack- ereling in the Bay of St. Lawrence; I have shared $241 to a share in one day's fishing on our own shores. The average difference in the two mackerel fisheries is, as two dollars for the Bay to five dollars for our own shores. I have been master of the schr. Mary Elizabeth, 4 years; Bloomfield, 2 years: David Osier, 2 years: Farragut, 5 years; Belle, 2 years; Elihu Burritt, 1 year; A. M. Dodd, 1 year; B. D. Haskins, 1 year. WILLIAM T. R.O.W.E. GLOUCESTER, Sept. 1, 1877. Sworn and subscribed before me, (L. S.) ADDISON CARTER, Justice of the Peace, and Deputy Collector of Port of Gloucester. No. 263. GLOUCESTER, Aug. 29, 1877. I, Oliver F. Howard, master of the late schooner Coll Ellsworth, of Gloucester, do on oath depose and say that I was born in Deer Isle, Maine, am 53 years of age, have been engaged in the fisheries 32 years. I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence 28 seasons mackereling, and am thoroughly acquainted with all the fisheries. The highest stock I ever made in the Bay mackereling was $5,000, and my lowest stock was $1400, and an American vessel must stock certainly $4,500 in the Bay mackerel fishery to pay her bills. I have mostly fished for mackerel off the Magdalen Islands, and of all the mackerel I have taken in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, not one-fourth were taken within 3 miles. I have never seen any interference with the shore boats, never heard any complaints of throwing over offal or mackerel gibs. My experience in this respect is that the mackerel cleanings is first-rate food for codfish, as they swarm around the vessel and eat it voraciously. As master and owner of my own vessel I have not made any money in the Bay mackereling. I have made a living and that is all. I should say that a fair average during the last 20 years would be 300 sail of American vessels in the Gulf, and with a full knowledge of the facts, I should say that 300 barrels is a full average catch for each vessel. I have been in the herring business 15 seasons. Invariably the herring are bought from the British fisher- men and paid for in cash. The only demand for these herring is from Americans or for the American market, or for bait. Without this mar- ket the herring would be entirely useless to the British people. I know that this herring trade has been of great advantage to the inhabitants of the English coasts. The Winter trade supplies them with 209 F. 3330 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. the only fishing they have at that season, and they would have no other employment if it were not for the herring trade. The American cod and halibut fishery is entirely a deep sea fishery, and there is no fish of this kind taken less than 12 miles from the shore, and most all of them are taken on the ocean banks. I have just returned from Gulf of St. Lawrence in the yacht America. The prospect there is not good for a large catch of mackerel. Last year I was in the Bay of St. Law- rence mackereling, and it was the poorest year I had ever known there. I observed a great many Albecores, sometimes called Baracoutas and Benitos, which are deadly foes to the mackerel, driving them away from every locality where these fish are found. In coming along the British coast and the American shores in the yacht America, we saw immense Quantities of these fish, and in my opinion the presence of these fish is fatal to the mackerel fishery while they remain in any locality. The albecore is a fish about 3 feet long, formed like a shark with a large fin erect on the back. They are extremely voracious and very Smart I have not seen any before for 8 years, and their presence is to my mind the reason of the mackerel being so scarce in the Gulf and along the British and American shores. The vessels I have commanded are as follows: Pocahontas, E. P. Howard, C. C. Davis, Typhoon, Catalina, Coll Ellsworth. & OLIVER F. HOWARD, Master Schooner Coll Ellsworth. COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, * GLOUCESTER, Aug. 29, 1877. County of EssEx, SS. 4. - Then personally appeared the above-named Oliver F. Howard, and made oath that the above statements by him subscribed are true, to the best of his knowledge and belief, before me, DAVID W. LOW, Notary Public. No. 264. GLOUCESTER, Aug. 25, 1877. I, Joseph W. Collins, master of the American Schr. Howard, of Glou- cester, on oath do depose and say:—That I was born in Islesboro, Maine, 38 years of age, have been engaged in the fisheries 28 years. I have just returned from a fishing voyage to the Western Banks. Have fished nearly every year partially on the Grand and Western Banks, since 1864. Have purchased bait at Newfoundland and Nova Scotia. There are two modes of keeping fish taken on these Banks: One method is the use of ice for a fresh halibut trip ; the other we use salt for a fresh fish trip, we carry some bait from home. We also take a few barrels of fresh herring from Nova Scotia and after the first set of our trawls we use the refuse fish taken on our trawls for bait for halibut, which is all sufficient for the purpose. I never caught any bait inshore and I never knew an Ameri- can vessel to get bait there other than by purchase. | The average amount of fresh bait taken at Nova Scotia is about 4 bar- rels of herring to each vessel for a fresh trip for halibut. For a salt trip for codfish we buy bait along the coast of Nova Scotia and at New- foundland. From 20 to 40 barrels baiting each on the long summer trips to the Grand Banks. We bait from 3 to 4 times usually at Newfound- land, averaging about 200 dollars for the whole trip. I have taken several whole fares without leaving the Bank, using for AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3331 bait Squid, taken on the Banks and refuse fish. The buying of bait on the shores of Newfoundland is a convenience rather than a necessity, the whole profit of the transaction resting with the Newfoundlanders. We also buy ice of the people, paying $24 to $3 per ton in gold for it. We also use ice from the icebergs. The only market for their ice is the ice used by American fishermen to preserve the bait fresh and it is only Within three years since this manner has been adopted by them. For centuries this fishery has been pursued successfully without this conven- ience of iced bait. - - When our vessels go into Newfoundland for bait they are delayed Often a fortnight, which of course is a loss to them. My trip in July, 1876, I was delayed a fortnight. The inhabitants are very eager for our trade, coming out to meet us in boats to solicit our patronage. The men Who furnish bait are operative fishermen. Since the advent of the American fleet these men have become independent of the coast traders and there is some feeling on the part of the traders on that account. The operative fishermen were formerly employed by the traders and paid out of the store mostly, but the American trade in herring paying money for them, has changed the relations largely. There is no fishery on the shores of the Dominion, or Newfoundland, used as a shore fishery for halibut and codfish by American fishermen. Their fisheries are wholly and purely deep sea fisheries. - * I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence for mackerel part of 22 sea- SODS. My highest stock was $8000 whole season. { % lowest { % { % $1800 66 66 An American vessel manned and equipped as the Bay-men are, must at the least stock $5000 for a season to pay her bills. In my experience not more than one-fourth of the mackerel taken were taken within 3 miles of the shore. I never heard such a thing as mackerel cleanings or Offal affecting the fish unfavorably, when thrown overboard. Often times after dressing and throwing the fresh offaloverboard, we have found the mackerel attracted by it and caught good decks of mackerel that had apparently come in to this as in to our throw bait. We use it often to extend our bait. The British boat fishery is pursued near the shore and the schooners will not venture in where they are, especially if he Wind is on shore owing to the shallowness of the water. The boat fish- ery is one thing, the schooner fishery another and different thing. I never knew of but one boat injured by the fleet and that was done by accident. The boat fishermen often come on board our vessels for favors which are cheerfully granted, and in the case of injury, above mentioned, the owners were well remunerated for the loss. The idea that fish offal thrown overboard can be detected by the smell after it has sunk is non- Sense. I have trans-shipped my mackerel in one instance, putting them on board a British vessel for freight home. The advantage of trans- Shipment at present is of no value whatever, as few or none of our Ves- Sels obtain a full trip, and the Bay mackereling has been a losing busi- ness the past 4 years and this year bids fair to be worse than any. JOS. W. COLLINS. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS, COUNTY OF ESSEX, S. S., GLOUCESTER, Aug. 28th, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named Joseph W. Collins and made oath that all the above statements by him subscribed are true te the best of his knowledge and belief, before me. [L. S.] DAVID W. LOW, Notary Public. 3332 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 265. GLOUGESTER, Aug. 25, 1877. I, John Glenn, was born in York, Maine; am 39 years of age, and on oath do depose and say, that I have been engaged in the fishing busi- ness twenty years. I have been mackereling in Gulf St. Lawrence for 10 seasons, mostly from Gloucester. The best stock I ever made was $5,000 in any season; was in the Abba H. Swasey, of Gloucester, buying a license for fishing inshore. We fished mostly around the Magdalen Islands, and about all our mackerel were taken there. $5,000 was the highest stock I ever made in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, mackerel fishing in the Abba H. Swasey. We did not have occasion to use our license. We were also on Bank Bradley. My lowest stock was $2,000, in 1871. An American Schooner for a full season’s fishing from June to last of October in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, must stock $5,000 to pay her bills. I never knew of any American vessel damaging the British boats, but, }. the contrary, have often had them come to us to grind bait, and other iſ a VOI’S. - -- This present season we went from York, Maine, to Gulf of St. Law- rence, codfishing, in schooner Anna F. Mason, 30 tons, carries 9 men. Commenced to fit the 1st of July; took no bait from home ; bought ice in the Gut of Canso ; paid $3 per ton for it; went up off Point Miscou; caught our bait on the grounds,-i. e., that is, 15 miles off the shore, in nets; the bait was herring, and commenced fishing with trawls; was there a fortnight; took 25,000 lbs. split fish ; threw most of the offal overboard. There were 10 other American vessels fishing at the same place; saw 20 Nova Scotia vessels up and down P. E. Island, fishing for codfish using hand lines. They throw over the offal as we do. Never knew of over 30 sail of American vessels in the Gulf codfishing. I should say there were 100 sail of American vessels mackereling. I know that while I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence that nót one- tenth part of the whole American catch of mackerel is taken within three miles of the shore. We have always thrown overboard the fish gurry, and I never have noticed any diminution of fish on that account. The American fleet fish in 20 fathoms of water, and they throw over their gurry in this deep water. We bought some supplies on our way home. I know of no inshore fishery for codfish now pursued by Ameri- can vessels in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The vessels in Maine can ob- tain any quantity of porgie slivers and clams for bait at home, but it is cheaper to catch the bait on the Banks. Bait was scarce on this trip on the fishing grounds. We could have obtained bait from the British shore fishermen at about the same price as it would cost to take it from home; but we prefer to take the chance of getting it on the fishing ground. There used to be quite a number of vessels from Maine pur- sue the codfishery in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, but of late years this has fallen off greatly. The fishermen have put their vessels into the American shore mack- erel fishery, which has been very much more profitable of late years. This present trip my crew shared $30 each ; time employed, six weeks. I have been master of the schooners Joe Hooker, Metacom, Iris, A. H. Mason. - JOHN GLENN, ~. Master of Schooner A. H. Mason, York, Me. GLOCESTER, Aug. 25, 1877. Personally appeared the above named John Glenn, and swore that the above statement by him subscribed, is true, before me. ADDISON CARTER, Justice of the Peace. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3333 NO. 266. GLOUCESTER, August 31, 1877. I, John P. Hutchinson, master of the schr. Robert T. Clark, of Bridge- port, Connecticut, do, on oath, depose and say, that I was born in New York, am 54 years of age, and have just returned from a voyage to Got- tenburg, Sweden. I started from Gloucester, the 21st of April, 1877, and went to the Magdalen Islands for herring. I carried no nets from Gloucester, but in the Straits of Canso, P. hired one seine and two boats, and 4 men, all British subjects. At the Island, the seine, manned by the owners, and some 6 others that I hired there, took about 400 barrels of herring. All the labor of taking, packing, etc., was done by British subjects, and their service paid for in cash. I also bought 200 barrels of herring from other British fishermen, paying about 25 cents per bar- rel, landed on board my vessel. Not being able to get as many herring as I wanted at the Magdalens, I started on the 20th of May for Fortune Bay. There were 30 American vessels at the Magdalen Islands after herring, buying and hiring the herring caught, the same as I was. Ar- rived at Fortune Bay on the 25th of May, and bought 1,300 barrels of herring from the people on shore, paid 80 cents per barrel in gold. Left Fortune Bay the 18th of June, and arrived at Gottenburg on the 5th of July, herring in good order, and sold slow, and at prices that will not more than pay the expenses of the voyāge. I found the people at Fortune Bay very desirous to sell. - My Voyage was as much a commercial voyage, as if I were buying po- tatoes or any other product of the Dominion; and all of the herring taken by other vessels, so far as I could observe, were bought and paid for in the same manner as I bought. I carried 2,000 bbls from Eastport which were never landed at Fortune Bay, but I was obliged to pay du- ties on them. I also paid light dues, $45. I have never been in the fishing business, and as far as my observa- tion goes, the trade with the American vessels at Newfoundland and the Magdalens is a source of profit, and large gains to the people there. The Joseph Wilder, an American vessel, was at Gottenburg when I was, and her cargo of herring was half rotten. Taking the whole of the European trade in herring, sent from this side, I should say, on the Whole, that there has been no money made in it by Americans. This trade is experimental, and the full results are, so far, not very satisfac- tory. JOHN P. HUTCEIINSON. COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, County of EssEx, SS. - GLOUCESTER, Sept. 1st, 1877. Then personally appeared John P. Hutchinson, above named, who made Oath, that all the above statements by him subscribed are true, to the best of his knowledge and belief, before me, (L. S.) DAVID W. LOW, Notary Public. No. 267. - GLOUCESTER, Aug. 31, 1877. I, James McIsaac, Master of the schooner Lais, of Port Hawkesbury, Nova Scotia, on oath do depose and say, that I was born in Port Hast- ings, Strait of Canso, am 42 years of age, that I have been engaged in 3334 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. the fisheries for 18 years, just arrived from Grand Banks and Gulf of St. Lawrence from a codfish trip. I brought in 80,000 lbs. codfish ; we took 60,000 lbs. on Grand Banks; the vessel sprung a leak, and we had to run in home. I, after my vessel was repaired, went on to bank Bradelle, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, where I took 20,000 more of cod- fish, 25 miles from shore. I caught my bait for this trip off Prince Edward Island, about three miles off from shore; the bait I used was mackerel. It is the usual custom of the vessels from Nova Scotia, bound to the Banks codfishing, to buy bait from the shore people of Newfoundland and Nova Scotia; the average price of herring is about $2 per barrel. I have paid as high as $3.50 per barrel. The market of the fishing vessels buying bait of the shore people is a very profitable one for the shoresmen, as they get more for their her- ring, selling them fresh, than any other way they can dispose of them. I have been to Newfoundland, to buy fresh herring, seven seasons, and when I first went there the people hardly had a net or a boat, and they were living very poorly; but now, owing to the herring trade with the American and other vessels, they are prosperous and are living in good style. They own boats and nets, and all of this prosperity is directly owing to this trade. There is no other market for these herring, and they would be useless if it were not for the market this trade affords On the Banks, for a fresh trip, we first use herring to start us, and then, after the first fish are caught, we use the refuse fish for bait. I have caught four trips on the Banks without having any herring, and took Squid on the Banks, and these squid, with the refuse, was all I used. I should say that if all the vessels would carry salt bait they would do full as well as they do now with herring. I think using fresh bait makes the fish dainty. The Provincetown vessels this year have done as well as any ves- sels with fresh bait; they using clams. I have never heard of any boats in the Bay being injured before the talk this year; but I have known the boats to flock around the American vessels to get the benefit of their bait, so that the vessels could not get a line into the water. I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence 10 seasons mackereling, in American vessels; never with seines; always with the hook. The best season’s work I ever made in the bay was $400 to a share. The poorest season was $200. I have not been in the bay for four years. Some years we get more inshore; some years get more offshore. I should say that one-half of the mackerel are, in my experience of hooking, taken in- shore, viz: within three miles. I never heard or knew of such a thing as fish cleanings hurting the fish ; that is a new idea. - The American seiners have made a great deal of money in Seining mackerel off their own coast; this I know, being where I could ascertain this fact. The American cod and halibut fishery is a deep-sea fishery entirely. Years ago a few trips were made up around Anticosti, but it is noth- ing to the great sea-fishing. Now they take all their fish on the Banks, off shore; none less than 12 miles off, and some 300 miles off. - JAMES MCISAAC. COMMON WEALTEI OF MASSA CEIUSETTS. County of Essex, ss. GLOUCESTER, Aug. 21, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named James McIsaac, and made oath that the above statement, by him subscribed, is true. Before me, ; (L. S.) DAVID W. LOW, Notary Public. Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3335 No. 268. GLOUCESTER, Aug. 28, 1877. I, John S. Jameson, master of the schr. Henry Wilson, of Gloucester, on oath, do depose and say: That I was born in Guysboro, Nova Scotia, am 46 years of age, have been engaged in the fisheries for 30 years. I have just arrived from a trip to Greenland for halibut. I brought home 120,000 lbs. of halibut and 30,000 lbs. of codfish. We caught our fish 25 miles from land. I have been 10 years in the Western and Grand Bank fisheries. We usually take 15 bbls. of porgie slivers for a trip from Gloucester, and either go to Nova Scotia or Newfoundland for fresh bait. We always buy this fresh bait and pay cash for it. We pay on an average about 14 dollars per barrel for this bait, taking 45 bbls to a trip, usually two trips a year. Sometimes we go in for bait 4 times to a trip, taking 45 bbls. each time. The bait costs us about 200 dollars for the full trip. If there was no demand for these herring the people would not catch them at all. The American fisheries on the Banks has absolutely created a new business for these people. I have caught a number of trips of fish without getting any fresh bait from the shore, using my slivers and refuse fish. The Grand Bank fisheries has been pursued for centuries, the first beginning of this shore fresh bait business is within 10 years. It is entirely to the advantage of the shore people of Newfoundland and other places to sell this bait, as they realize large sums from what would otherwise be of no value whatever to them. There is nearly a half million dollars paid to the English people for herring by Americans, including the Winter fresh herring trade. This would be entirely worthless to them except for the American trade. The American cod and halibut fishery is entirely a deep sea fishery. With centuries of fishing on the sea Banks and for centuries throwing over offal there is no real diminution of fish there. The use of fresh bait has made the fish dainty and on the whole it has been an injury to our fishing there using this bait. If all the Bank fishermen would use Salt bait it would be better for the whole. I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence for mackerel 10 years or sea- Sons. Not more than one-fourth of the mackerel are taken within three miles of the shore by the Americans. American vessels in the Bay will not average more than three hundred barrels of mackerel each for a Seasons mackereling there, this is a fair average for 10 years. - JOHN S. JAMESON. COMMON WEALTEH OF MASSA CHUSETTS. + COUNTY OF EssFX, s. s. GLOUCESTER, Aug, 28, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named James S. Jameson and made oath that all the statements by him subscribed are true before me. (L. S.) DAVID W. LOW, - Notary Public. NO. 269. GLOUCESTER, September 3, 1877. I, James L. Anderson, Master of the American schr. Seth Stockbridge, of Gloucester, Mass., do, on oath, depose and say, that I was born in Middle Millford, Straits of Canso, am 37 years of age. I have been en- gaged in the Gulf of St. Lawrence mackerel fishery for 24 seasons. I have just returned from a trip to the Gulf of St. Lawrence for mack- erel. 3336 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. I began to fit my vessel for this trip on the 11th of July, 1877, sailed from Gloucester on the 14th ; went down to the coast of Maine, and seined porgies for bait; took 30 bbls of slivers; I arrived in the Gulf of St. Lawrence on the 28th of July; caught our first mackerel off East Point, 4 miles from shore; took 15 barrels; then went up the east side of Prince Edward Island, as far as New London, tried all the way up, and got no mackerel. We then ran down the Island to Second Chapel, and took 10 barrels of mackerel there, inside of three miles. Then run down to the Magdalen Islands, and took 45 barrels in four days on the hook, off Brine Island, over three miles from shore. I then went back to P. E. Island, fished there for a week, and did not get 10 barrels of mackerel. We then went to the whole northern side of Cape Breton, tried all the way for mackerel, and got nothing. Again went to the Magdalen Islands, tried there 4 days, and got 5 barrels of mackerel; went back to P. E. Island again, tried all round the north, east, and south sides, and fonnd nothing. I then fished off Port Hood, and Cape George, took 10 barrels of mackerel, and being completely discouraged, I left the Bay on the 24th of August. We could find no mackerel, neither had any vessels we saw, seen any mackerel to speak of for a fortnight. I know that the mackerel fishery in the Gulf of St. Lawrence is a thorough and complete failure this year, and cannot help being a great loss to American owners and fishermen, in having their vessels go there at all. I think the mackerel went out of the Bay, for the rea- son that there was nothing in the water for them to eat. I consider that the large amount of bait formerly thrown by the American fleet, when fishing with hooks, had a great effect in keeping the mackerel in the Bay. Since the vessels have ceased to go there in large numbers, this bait has not been there to keep them in. Each American vessel used to throw, on an average, 90 barrels of bait in a season, costing from 4 to 6 dollars per barrel. My present trip from the Gulf of St. Lawrence packed out 90 barrels of mackerel, mostly No. 2s, a few No. 1s and No. 3s. The time consumed from the date of fitting, to final settlement, will be just two months. My vessel is a new, first-class vessel, rating 90 tons, new measure- ment. I had a Seine boat and seine, partly used, worth 750 dollars. My vessel's charter is worth $300 per Month, for 2 months $600 00 The use of Seine and boat for 2 months, 150 00 Sixteen Men's Wages, at $30 per Month, for 2 Months, 960 00 Captain's Wages at $75 per Month, “ 150 00 Outfits, including Provisions, Bait, Salt Barrels, &c., 500 00 Packing and Inspection, 70 00 Insurance, 100 00 Total Cost, - * $2,530 00 RECEIPTS. Ninety Barrels of Mackerel, at $12, $1,080 00 Actual Loss, $1,450 00 In 1875, I was in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and cruised all over it, and found no mackerel at all. I have been in the Gulf of St. Lawrence for the last 20 years, every year, except 1873, 1874, 1876. I did not go there last year, as all the reports showed that there was no mackerel there. Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3337 In all my experience in taking mackerel in the Gulf, not more than one-fourth are taken within three miles of the shore. I have taken Whole entire trips with not a single mackerel of them taken Within five miles of the shore. \ I have seined off the American shore parts of five years. I have stocked in a single season, seining mackerel there alone, reckoning no other fish, Seven thousand six hundred dollars in a season. The best stock I ever made in the Gulf of St. Lawrence mackerel fishery in one whole season, was six thousand seven hundred dollars. These figures are taken from my books, and are correct. My poorest stock in the Gulf of St. Lawrence mackerel fishery was in 1875, when I tried all over the Gulf, and could not raise a mackerel. Of course, I Stocked nothing. During the past 10 years, the American shore mackerel have been greatly superior to the Bay mackerel of the same brand in texture, qual- ity, and price. On the American shore, we take mackerel sometimes close in, and they are sometimes taken on Georges Banks 100 miles off. I have been some trips to the Western Banks for cod-fish, and we bought our fresh bait of the shore people of the Dominion of Canada, always paying cash for it. . The people make more than double the profit selling herring to the American fishermen, than in any other manner that they can dispose of them. I have caught a whole trip on the Banks, entirely by the use of Salt bait, carried from the United States. $ Fish offal, when thrown overboard in very shoal water, has a tendency to keep fish away until the water clears; but in deep water, there is no perceptible effect on the fish. I never knew of the shore boats being interfered with, or injured by the vessels. The American schooners are Very particular not to trouble the boats; and it is a universal fact that the schooners never can get any mackerel on the grounds inshore, in shoal water, where the boats usually fish. I never took 10 barrels of mack- erel on the boat's fishing grounds in all my fishing in the Bay. * I have “hove to ” this year near where the boats were fishing and getting some mackerel, and we could not catch a mackerel. In most of the places where the boats fish, my vessel could not go in, as they fish in from two to four fathoms of water, and my vessel draws 12 feet of water; and this fact applies to most of the American schooners. I have been to Grand Manan for herring, to carry to Gloucester, to bait Georges men, and paid from 65 cents to one dollar per hundred for fresh herring, and the same herring for any other purpose or market was Inot Worth to the people who took them 25 cents a hundred to salt. The Shore people always catch the herring. I have had but one trip of mackerel sent home from the Bay by trans- Shipment, and that trip cost just one dollar per barrel to get them to Gloucester by a sailing vessel. This was in 1861. I have been master of the following schooners:—The Morning Light, IPescador, Ida Thurlow, Benj. Haskell, George S. Low, Seth Stockbridge. CAPT. JAMES L. ANDERSON. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS. GLOUCESTER, Aug. 4, 1877. COUNTY OF ESSEX, SS. Then personally appeared the above named James L. Anderson, Cap- tain, and made oath, that all the statements by him subscribed, are true, to the best of his knowledge and belief, before me, (L. S.) DAVID W. LOW, Notary Public. 3338 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. NO. 270. GLOUCESTER, Aug. 27, 1877. I, Jesse Lewis, Master of the American schr, Alice M. Lewis, of Glou- Cester, on oath do depose and say, that I was born in Kittery, Maine, am 48 years age, and have been engaged in the fisheries 35 years. I have just arrived from the Gulf of St. Lawrence from a mackereling trip. I commenced to fit my vessel for this trip the 1st of July, 1877. I sailed from Gloucester the 5th of July, arrived in the Gulf of St. Lawrence about the 14th of July. Was fitted with a purse seine and boat, and One Small Seine. The first mackerel I took two miles off East Point, in the Seine,—about 100 brls., mostly twos; from there went off Point Miscou and Gaspe; got no mackerel there; came back to Prince Edward Island; caught 50 brls. on the hook near the shore. We afterward went to the Magdalen Islands, and caught about 50 brls. on the hook, along the shore. The average of these mackerel were twos, worth 12 dollars per bbl. Our trip packed out 175 bbls., and brought 2,100 dollars. My trip will consume just two months' time, for vessel and crew. The charter of my vessel, at $250 per month, $500 00 Wages of 15 men, at $30 per month, 900 00 Outfits, viz., provisions, salt, barrels, etc., 500 00 Insurance, 100 00 Packing, 131 25 Expense of seines, wear and mending and use, 200 00 Hooks and lines, .* 25 00 Total cost, 2 $2,356 25 Total receipts, $2,100 00 Actual and real loss, $256 25 I have been in the Bay 28 seasons,—24 mackereling and 4 codfishing. My average stock for the whole of the seasons in the Bay is $4,500 a Season. Not Over one-third of the mackerel I have taken there were taken within three miles of the shore. We always throw overboard the cleanings of the mackerel, except what we save to use as throw-bait. The fish come eagerly after this offal. I never heard of any being poisoned by it; but they swarm to get it. I never heard any fishermen complain, as I have seen them this year, the British boats throwing all their offal overboard. This is the universal practice of all fishermen, American and English. The practice of lee-bowing is universal, both by English and Ameri- can vessels. I never knew of any British boats being injured by the American Schooners. The American and British mode of fishing are entirely different, as the boat fishing is a shore fishery, and the large, American schooners cannot, on account of the depth of water, fish where the boats generally resort. The boats obtain many favors from the American vessels, such as using their mills to grind bait, and often giving them salt and bait. The boat fishermen, as a class, have always been jealous of the American fishermen. I have this year given bait to a number of their boats. The years that our fishermen were totally excluded from the inshore mackerel fishing by the cutters, they made the best fares. That is my personal experience. I know of no inshore Codfishery pursued by American vessels in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. I never caught a codfish there inside of 15 miles from the shore, nor ever knew any American vessel so doing. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3339 There are more British than American vessels engaged in the codfish- ery of the Gulf of St. Lawrence; they all throw their offal overboard, including the shore boats. I went to Newfoundland 19 years ago, for herring; have been 15 trips since. Inever caught a herring there, but in- variably bought them, and paid the inhabitants for them. When I first went there I paid one dollar per bbl.; they are now worth from $1.50 to $2. The American trade in herring has kept the people from starvation, and raised whole communities from poverty to comparative affluence. I have known $60,000 to be paid for herring in Fortune Bay alone, by the American fleet, in one single winter, and there would have been none Sold otherwise, as there is not any demand for these herring, except by Americans, for the American market. I think there are about 100 sail of Americans in the Bay this year. The average number of American Vessels in the Gulf of St. Lawrence the past 20 years is not over 250 vessels, taking one year with another. Out of the fleet this year there is not over a dozen that have taken as many mackerel as I have, and a large proportion of the fleet are leaving the Bay entirely discouraged. The Wm. S. Baker has arrived in Gloucester, within two hours, from the Bay of St. Lawrence with only five barrels of 'mackerel. I have been master of the schooners Susan E. Brown, Hattie Lewis, Ida May, Two Forty, Theron F. Dale, Alice M. Lewis. JESSE LEWIS. COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACEIUSETTS. | County of Essex, SS. GLoucestER, Aug. 27, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named Jesse Lewis, and made oath, that all the above statements by him subscribed, are true to the best of his knowledge and belief, before me. DAVID W. LOW. (L. S.) Notary Public. - No. 271. GLOUCESTER, Sept. 3, 1877. I, Samuel M. Farmer, master of the schooner Maud Muller, of Glou- Cester, on oath do depose and say, that I was born in Booth Bay, Me. I have just returned from a trip to the coast of Maine. I have been ab- Sent five weeks. I brought home 230 barrels of mackerel, making 40 barrels No. 1's and 190 barrels No. 2's. The No. 1's are worth $24 per barrel, the No. 2's are worth $15 per barrel. My whole trip is worth $3,810. The charter of my vessel is worth $100 per month - $125 00 Thirteen men . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 390 00 Bait --------------------------------------- * ſº dº sº 30 00 Outfits -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------- 150 00 Insurance -------------------------------------- 50 00 Packing and Inspection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 00 Use of Seine and Boat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -, * is e º ºr ºn ºf 75 00 Cost of trip. -----------. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $992 00 Receipts 230 barrels mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 810 00 *=mºse. Profit ------------------------------------ $2,818 00 My vessel fs only 45 tons. She took these mackerel 8 miles from Mount Desert Rock. The mackerel are schooling in every direction 3340 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. there. I am going back immediately. I think the prospect is good for a large Fall catch on our shores. I have been in the Bay of St. Lawrence three seasons for mackerel, in 1868, 1869, 1870—three years. 1870 I made $66 for the season, the two years previous we shared $270, each man for 5 months fishing. These were extra good years in the |Bay. - Of all the mackerel we took during the three years amounting to nearly 1,800 barrels, only 90 wash barrels were taken on Sudick shoals within three miles of the shore. - I have on the American shore made $500 to a share in a season, the least I ever made on this shore mackereling was $400, a season of five months. The Bay mackerel fishery for this and the two last years has been an entire failure. I have been to Grand Manan one Winter for herring. I bought my herring of the people on shore, paying cash for them. I paid from 60 to 90 cents per hundred. There is no market, and no use to which these herring can be put that will begin to pay the peo- ple the amount of profit that this sale to American vessels produces. I have also been to the Western Banks fishing for cod. We took one baiting at New Brunswick and one at Cape Breton, paying 50 cents per hundred at New Brunswick, and $1 per barrel at Cape Breton in cash. At Cape Breton the herring remaining on hand were thrown overboard after we were baited, as there was no vessels there to take them, they were worthless for any purpose for which the people could use them. - SAMUEL M. FARMER. COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, GLOUCESTER, Sept. 3d, 1877. County of Essex, SS. Then personally appeared the above-named Samuel M. Farmer, and made oath that all the above statements by him subscribed, are true to the best of his knowledge and belief, before me, - DAVID W. LOW, Notary No. 272. I, Alexander McDonald, of Provincetown, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, being duly sworn, do depose and say that I am thirty years of age and am the captain of the schooner Willie A. Jowell, engaged in fishing for cod upon the Grand Banks and I have returned with one thousand quintals of fish—all taken on trawls. I have been trawling for cod for nine years and until this year have always used salt clams for bait, which I carried from home. This year I went to Newfoundland to purchase fresh bait for the first time. I arrived at the Bay of Bulls about the eighteenth day of July to get fresh bait, with seven hundred quintals on board, taken previously with salt clams and squid caught on the Banks. I found no bait at Bay of Bulls and left for Cape Royal finding no bait there either. Then went to Portugal Cove, Conception Bay, where I had to wait five days before I could purchase any bait at all. I then returned to the Banks with twenty barrels of squid for which I paid about thirty cents per hundred, having been absent from the fish- ing grounds about two weeks. I caught one hundred quintals with the Squid I had purchased at Newfoundland, the remainder of the trip I caught with salt bait at Newfoundland, and if I had not wasted so much time in going to Newfoundland after fresh bait I should have caught AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3341 more fish on the Banks and have came home earlier. I have never fished for bait at Newfoundland but have always purchased it and if excluded from purchasing I certainly should not go to Newfoundland to catch it myself. I consider the trade in bait to be of great advantage to the in- habitants of Newfoundland. While at Portugal Cove I paid William Talk, the collector, sixteen 80-100 dollars ($16.80) for light dues, being at the rate of twenty-four cents per ton, and this due is collected from all American fishing vessels visiting Newfoundland. l ALEX. MCDONALD. Sworn before me at Halifax, this 29th day of September, A. D. 1877. * N. H. MEAGEIER, Notary Public for the Province of Nova Scotia. No. 273. I, Alonzo Covey, of Swampscott, in the Commonwealth of Massachu- setts, being duly sworn, do depose and say that I am fifty-three years old, and am the captain of the A. C. Newhall, a fishing vessel of twenty- nine (29) tons, at present in Halifax, Nova Scotia. I have been en- gaged in the fishing business, both as captain and hand, for twenty-five years. I have just returned from a trip to the Bay of St. Lawrence, mackerel fishing. I left Swampscott the 28th day of last July, and ar- rived in the Bay the 7th of August. I first fished near Port Hood, and took four barrels of mackerel six miles from the shore. I then took twenty-five barrels twelve miles broad off Mimmigash. Then fished off Skinneack from 5 to 15 miles from the land, and took the balance of my trip there, with the exception of 14 barrels, which were taken between East Cape and Port Hood. I took one hundred and twenty-five barrels in the Bay, all of which were taken more than three miles from land, except five barrels at North Cape taken inshore. This trip has not been successful. The share of the vessel will not more than pay the cost of the Outfit. Before this season I have been engaged in fishing on the TJnited States coast, and my trips there have been much more remuner- ative than my present trip to the Bay. I do not consider the privilege of fishing within three miles of the Canadian coast of any value to American fishermen, and I should much prefer to be entirely excluded therefrom, and the former duty of two dollars per barrel to be imposed On the Canadian fish. - ALONZO CoVEY. Sworn before me in the City of Halifax, in the County of Halifax, this 29th day of September, A. D., 1877. ROBT. SEDGEWICK, Notary Public. No. 274. I, Edward N. Wilkins, of Swampscott, in the Commonwealth of Mas' sachusetts, being duly sworn, do depese and say that I am forty-two years old. I have been a fisherman for twenty-five years, and am now One of the crew of the schooner A. C. Newhall, Captain Covey, and have just returned from the Bay of St. Lawrence. We caught 125 barrels of mackerel, all of which were taken more than three miles from the shore with the exception of five barrels taken inshore between North Cape and Mimnigash, Prince Edward Island. Previous to this year I have been in the Bay mackerel fishing twelve seasons, the last trip was in 3342 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 1873 in the schooner Knight Templar, of Gloucester, we took 450 barrels of mackerel, all of which were taken more than 3 miles from the shore except about 50 barrels taken inshore near Rustico. In all my trips to the Bay I do not think that one-fifth of all the mackerel taken were caught within three miles of the shore. * EDWARD N. WILKINS. Sworn before me, at the City of Halifax, in the County of Halifax, this 29th day of September, A. D. 1877. ROBT. SEDGEWICK, Notary Public. No. 275. I, John S. Staples, of Swans Island, Maine, on oath depose and say that I am master of the schr, John Somes, of Portland, Me., and have been engaged in catching mackerel during this season, commenced by fishing off the American shore, and caught 450 barrels which averaged $10 per barrel. The favorable reports from Canso induced me to go down the Bay of St. Lawrence and I accordingly sailed about the 25th of July. I was on the trip a little over a month, tried for mackerel all the way from Port Hood to New London Head, and from there to Mag- dalene Islands and from there to Margaree Island, and succeeded in getting only eleven barrels which are worth $8 per barrel. I lost on this trip to the Bay $1500, at the least calculation. At Canso I was visited by the officer who exacted one dollar from me for the support of buoys—this is collected of all American vessels. I arrived home from the Bay about the 3rd Sept. and since that time I have caught 150 barrels of mackerel on this shore, which are worth $1400. In year 1872 I was master of Schr. Joseph Story, of Gloucester, was in the Bay mackereling and caught 250 barrels, not over 10 barrels of which were caught within three miles of the shore. In the year 1873 I was captain of the same schooner and fished for mackerel off the American shore and took 900 barrels, from which we stocked $8,000. In 1874 I was in the said schooner up to July 25th, when I left her on account of sick- ness, up to that time we took 650 barrels, from which we stocked $3,500 all this year the said schooner fished on the American shore. After I left her the said Schooner took 600 barrels. In 1875 I was in Schooner Rushlight and fished for mackerel on the American coast, and took during the season 900 barrels and stocked about $7,000. In 1876 (last year) I was in the schooner John Somes, and fished for mackerel the whole season on the American shore and took 1,600 barrels and stocked $9,500. I would state that previous to the years enumerated above, I was in the Bay mackereling for 15 years and am confident that not one-twentieth part of the mackerel caught were caught within the three-mile limit. I consider and regard the mackerel fishery on the American shore as far more superior and valuable than the British Bay fishery. In the Winter of 1870 I was in the schooner Annie E. Friend, and went to Grand Manan for cargo of frozen herring, and bought 300,000 at the rate of 45 cents per 100. There was at the time 20 sail of vessels there after herring, all of which loaded with herring and bought them öf the inhabitants—they carrying all the way from 150,000 to 400,000, at from 40 to 60 cents per 100. This trade with the American is of great importance to the inhabitants, as they would undoubtedly suffer were it not for this trade as they get a great deal of money from this source, which is all clear gain to them, as they have no other market for their herring. JOHN S. STAPLES, Master of Schooner John Somes. Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3343 CUSTOM House, GLOUCESTER, Oct. 4, 1877. Personally appeared Capt. John S. Staples, who subscribed to the foregoing statement, and made oath that the foregoing statement was true, before me. - * z ADDISON CARTER, Special Deputy Collector and Justice of the Peace, No. 276. GLOUCESTER, August 25, 1877. I, Daniel McNeil, on oath depose and say, that I was born on Cape Breton; am 34 years of age; have been engaged in the fisheries for 21 years, principally in the Bank fishing on Grand Bank, Western and Quero; have been master for five years; am now master of the schooner Eben Parsons, of Gloucester. Arrived from the Grand Banks this week. Have always bought my bait of the inhabitants of Newfound- land. I paid $80 for my bait on the last trip, and I did not get a full baiting. I have never fished for bait at Newfoundland, neither have I ever known any of the American fishermen to do so at Newfoundland,— always invariably buying what they needed,—and, in fact, if they wished to catch their bait they could not, for they are fitted with no appliances for the purpose. The inhabitants of Newfoundland are very anxious for this trade, always coming on board, even before I can come to anchor, soliciting the sale of this bait; and though the American fish- ermen pay the highest price for their bait, ice and supplies, still I re- gard it as cheaper to do so. This bait supply to the fishermen furnishes occupation to a large part of the inhabitants, and is quite lucrative to those engaged in it. This trade has been patronized by the Americans (engaged in the Bank fishery) very generally for the last seven years. Previous to that time, it was the custom to catch our bait on the Banks. Fish-peas, fish cut up, birds and squid constituted our bait. The in- habitants of Newfoundland find the only market for their bait in the French and American Bank fleet. I regard this traffic of vastly more importance to the inhabitants of Newfoundland than to the American fishermen, as we could procure our bait, as heretofore, on the Banks. I have seen 20 sail of American vessels in a small cove at Newfoundland for bait, which they uniformly purchased. If prevented from purchas- ing bait at Newfoundland, the Americans could procure this bait at the French Islands, where the French fleet of Bankers get their bait and Supplies. DANIEL MCNEIL. GLOUCESTER, Aug. 25, 1877. Sworn to and subscribed before me, ADDISON CARTER, Justice of the Peace. No. 277. I, Charles E. Parkhurst, of Gloucester, in the State of Massachusetts, book-keeper, on oath depose and say, that schooner Energy was built and owned by my father, Charles Parkhurst, and run by him in the fish- ing business until she was sold to go to California. That in 1868 she was engaged in the Gulf of St. Lawrence mackerel fishery ; that she sailed July 18th, and returned Nov. 14th, 1868; was absent three months and twenty-six days, making but one voyage. She brought home and packed out one hundred and thirty-three (133) barrels of mackerel, 3344 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. which was all her catch for that season. The vessel's share was $1,085. That James Howlett was one of the crew of said vessel on said voyage, Which was the only voyage he made in her after mackerel. That his share of said voyage was eighty-seven dollars and 71-100, which was trusteed and paid to Lawyer Perrin. - CHARLES E. PARKHURST. ESSEX, S. S., Sept. 21st, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named Charles E. Parkhurst and made oath that the above statement, by him subscribed, is true, before COMMONWEALTH OF sº Ime, •4 DAVID W. LOW, Notary Public. NO. 278. COMMON WEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, LSSEx, SS. I, Zebulon Tarr, of Gloucester, in said County of Essex, and Com- monwealth of Massachusetts, do hereby certify that I have been en- gaged in the herring business somewhat extensively in the Province of New Brunswick, in the harbors of Deer Isle, St. Andrew’s, Blies Island, and other harbors at which herring are to be bought or obtained. Within the last ten years I have bought fifteen trips of herring, averag- ing two hundred and twenty thousand each, at a cost of four dollars and fifty cents a thousand, amounting to fourteen thousand eight hun- dred and fifty dollars. Two trips, three hundred thousand each, at five dollars a thousand, amounting to three thousand dollars. Witness my hand, this seventeenth day of October, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and seventy-seven. ŻEBULON TARR. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, IFSSEx, SS. RocKPORT, October 17th, 1877. Then personally appeared the above named Zebulon Tarr, and made solemn oath to the truth of the foregoing statement by him subscribed, before me y NATHANIEL F. S. YORK, Justice of the Peace. NO. 279. We have been asked to make a statement of the number of barrels of herring caught in American waters on the coast of the United States, and the number of barrels of herring caught in Foreign waters during the last year handled by us, and to state the relative value of each barrel in its green state as it is when taken from the Water. We find upon examination of our books that we have taken in our business during the last year (28,208) twenty-eight thousand two hun- dred and eight barrels of herring. - (16,063) sixteen thousand and sixty-three barrels were caught on the eoast of the United States, between Eastport, Maine, and Provincetown, Massachusetts. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3345 The herring cost us for those caught on the coast of the United States from two dollars and twenty-five cents to two dollars and seventy-five cents per barrel; that is for the herring, not including the barrel, salt, labor, etc., etc. - *~, (12,145) twelve thousand one hundred and forty-five barrels were caught on the coast of Newfoundland, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia, Mag- dalen Islands, and Labrador, as follows:— Barrels. Caught at Fortune Bay, Nfid. . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 587 { % “ Port Hood, C. B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 & 4 “ Nova Scotia (coast). . . . . . . . . . . . 348 × 12,145 { % “ Magdalens. . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * 510 | § { “ Bay of Islands, Nfid. . . . . . . . . . . 2, 500 y Those caught at Fortune Bay in-paid seventy-five cents, gold, per bar- rel; at Port Hood, one dollar per barrel; Nova Scotia, one dollar per barrel; Magdalens, seventy-five cents per barrel; and at Bay of Islands, Nfld.; two dollars per barrel. These prices include what is paid for the fish, and does not include the barrels, salt, labor, etc., etc. All the herring which we put up in the Provinces as stated herein, We bought from the fishermen and paid them at prices as stated ; and in no case whatever did we ever, catch any in nets or seines, but always purchased the fish from the natives. The above number of barrels does not include any herring which our vessels brought in the Provinces during the year, for bait. We have taken from our books the number of barrels packed. GLOUCESTER, MAss., U. S. A., October 17th, 1877. s D. C. & H. BABSON. WITNESS—CHAs. H. BROWN. COMMON WEALTH OF MASSAOEIUSETTS. October 17th, 1877. ESSEX, SS. Then personally appeared the within named Horatio Babson, and made oath to the truth of the within statement by him subscribed, in behalf of said firm of D. C. & H. Babson, before me. Witness my hand and official seal the day and year last above writ. ten. [L. S.] JAMES DAVIS, *. Notary Public. No. 280. William Cogswell, of Salem, County of Essex, and Commonwealth of Massachusetts, on oath, deposes and says, that since August 24th, A. D., 1866, he has held, and does now, hold the office of Inspector-General of Fish, within and for the said Commonwealth ; the duties of which Said office, among other things, are to Supervise, either personally or by deputy, the packing and inspecting of all pickled fish put up within Said Commonwealth, to keep an accurate account of the same, and to report thereon in detail, as to the number of barrels, the quality and kind of such fish, to the Secretary of the Commonwealth, that he is under bonds to the Treasurer of the said Commonwealth, in the sum of ten thousand dollars; that in the discharge of his du- ties, he is assisted by some one hundred deputies, more or less, in the different seaport towns of Said Commonwealth, each of whom 210 F 3346 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. are under bonds to him in the sum of six thousand dollars; that he has given especial attention to informing himself from all possible sources of information, in what waters, and what coasts the fish, which has passed under his supervision since he came into his said office, were caught; that he has also required and received sworn returns or affida- vits from a large number of his deputies, many of whom are owners of the fishing vessels; many of whom have been engaged in the fishing it- self, and all of whom have as accurate knowledge on the subject as is pos- sible to be obtained, showing the number of barrels of fish caught within the three mile line of the coast of Her, Britannic Majesty's Do- minions in North America, during the fishing seasons of 1867 and 1876, inclusive, upon which said returns or affidavits, and upon his own best knowledge and belief, and upon his own reports as aforesaid, he says as follows:—That in the year ending December 20th, 1867, there were in- spected in said Commonwealth, two hundred and eleven thousand five hundred and ten barrels of mackerel, and no more ; that he has affida- vits as aforesaid, covering some ninety-seven thousand barrels of said mackerel, of which only some two thousand were caught within said three mile line, or in other words, about two and one-sixteenth per cent., which applied to the whole catch of that year, would give some forty- three hundred and sixty barrels of mackerel only that were caught within said line, in said year of 1867. \ That in the year ending December 20th, 1868, there were inspected in said Commonwealth, one hundred and eighty thousand and fifty-six barrels of mackerel and no more. That of this number he has affida- vits as aforesaid covering some one hundred and two thousand barrels of said mackerel and no more of which only some sixteen hundred bar- rels were caught within said three mile line, or in other words some one and one-half per cent. which applied to the whole catch of that year would give some twenty-seven hundred barrels of mackerel only that were caught within said three mile line in said year of 1868. - That in the year ending December 20th, 1869, there were inspected in said Commonwealth, two hundred and thirty-four thousand two hun- dred barrels of mackerel and no more, and that of this number he has affidavits as aforesaid covering some one hundred and thirty-two thou- sand barrels and no more of said mackerel, of which only eighteen hun- dred barrels were caught within said three-mile line, or in other words some one and one-third per cent. which applied to the whole catch of that year, would give some thirty-one hundred barrels of mackerel only that were caught within said three-mile line in said year of 1869. That in the year ending December 20th, 1870, there were inspected in said Commonwealth three hundred and eighteen thousand five hundred and twenty-one barrels of mackerel and no more, and that of this num- ber he has affidavits as aforesaid, covering some one hundred and ninety- eight thousand barrels and no more of said mackerel, of which only some twenty-five hundred barrels were caught within said three mile line, or in other words some one and one-eight per cent. which applied to the whole catch of that year would give some thirty-five hundred barrels of mackerei only that were caught within said three mile line in said year of 1870. & That in the year ending December 20th, 1871, there were inspected in said Commonwealth, two hundred and fifty-nine thousand, four hundred and sixteen barrels and no more, of mackerel, and that of this number he has affidavits as aforesaid, covering Some one hundred and eighty- five thousand barrels and no more of said mackerel, of which only some eighteen hundred barrels were caught within said three mile line, or in AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 334-7 other words some one per cent., which applied to the whole catch of that year, would give some twenty-five hundred barrels mackerel, only that were caught within said three-mile line in said year of 1871. That in the year ending December 20th, 1872, there were inspected in this Commonwealth one hundred and eighty one-thousand nine hundred and fifty-seven barrels of mackerel, and no more; and that of this num- ber he has affidavits as aforesaid, covering some one hundred and twenty- eight thousand barrels, and no more, of said mackerel,-of which only some sixteen hundred barrels were caught within said three-mile line, or, in other words, some one and one-sixth per cent., which applied to the whole catch of that year, would give some two thousand one hun- dred and twenty-three barrels of mackerel only that were caught within said three-mile line in said year of 1872. That in the year ending December 20th, 1873, there were inspected in said Commonwealth, one hundred eighty-five thousand seven hundred and forty-eight barrels of mackerel, and no more; and that of this num- ber he has affidavits as aforesaid, covering some one hundred and forty- one thousand barrels, and no more, of said mackerel, of which only some twenty-four hundred barrels were caught within said three-mile line,— or, in other words, some one and three-eighths per cent., -which, applied to the whole catch of that year, would give some twenty-eight hundred barrels of mackerel only that were caught within said three mile line in said year of 1873. - That in the year ending December 20th, 1874, there were inspected in said Commonwealth, two hundred and fifty-eight thousand three hun- dred and eighty barrels of mackerel, and no more ; and that of this number he has affidavits as aforesaid, covering some one hundred and eighty-four thousand barrels, and no more, of said mackerel, of which Only some eight hundred barrels were caught within said three-mile line,—or, in other words, some three-sixteenths of one per cent., which, applied to the whole catch of that year, would give some eleven hun- dred barrels of mackerel only that were caught within said three-mile line in said year of 1874. That in the year ending December 20th, 1875, there were inspected in said Commonwealth, one hundred and thirty thousand and fourteen barrels of mackerel, and no more ; and that he has affidavits covering Some ninety thousand barrels, and no more, of said mackerel, of which only some three hundred barrels were caught within said three-mile line, or in other words, some one-third of one per cent, which applied to the whole catch of that year, would give some four hundred and thirty-three barrels of mackerel only that were caught within the said three-mile line in said year of 1875. That in the year ending December 20th, 1876, there were inspected in said Commonwealth, two hundred and twenty-five thousand nine hun- dred and forty-one barrels of mackerel, and no more; and that he has affidavits as aforesaid, covering some one hundred and ninety thousand barrels, and no more of said mackerel, of which only some three hun- dred barrels were caught within said three mile line, or in other words, some one-sixth of one per cent., which, applied to the whole catch of that year, would give some three hundred and seventy-six barrels of mackerel only that were caught within said three mile line in said year of 1876. And said deponent doth further depose and say, upon his best judgment, information and belief, that of the whole number of barrels of mackerel inspected in said Commonwealth, from 1867 to 1876, inclu- Sive, amounting to nearly two million two hundred thousand barrels, not more than some twenty-three thousand barrels were caught within 3348 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. the said three mile line. That of the whole number of barrels of mackerel inspected in said Commonwealth from 1873 to 1876, inclusive, amounting to some eight hundred thousand barrels, not more than Some forty-seven hundred and nine barrels were caught within said three mile line. And that for the last four or five years preceding the date hereof, the catch of mackerel within said three mile line, and off the coasts, or in the Bays along the coasts of Her Britannic Majesty's Dominion in North America has been rapidly decreasing, the catch within the three mile line as aforesaid, decreasing from twenty-eight hundred barrels in 1873 to eleven hundred barrels in 1874, to four hundred and thirty-three barrels in 1875, to three hundred and seventy-six barrels in 1876. That from his own personal knowledge, the fishing firms of said Common- wealth, during the last four or five years as aforesaid, have substantially given up as of but little or no profit what is known as the “Bay fishing,” and have confined their fishing vessels substantially to the shores, bays, and coasts within the jurisdiction of the United States of America. Witness my hand, at Boston, County of Suffolk, and Commonwealth of Massachusetts, this day of August, A. D., 1877. - WM. COGSWELL, Inspector-General of Fish for Massachusetts. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE COMMONWEALTH, SUFFOLK, s. s. This may certify that William Cogswell, of Salem, County of Essex and Commonwealth aforesaid, has held the office of Inspector General of fish within and for this Commonwealth since Aug. 24, A. D. 1866, and does now hold the said office, and that on this twentieth day of August, 1877, said Cogswell personally appeared before me and made oath that the foregoing statement by him subscribed was true, according to his best judgement, information and belief. Witness my hand and the Great Seal of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the year and date above Written. (L. S.) HENRY B. PEIRCE, Secretary of the Commonwealth. A. E. E. H. N. D.I X N. EXTRACT FROM MINUTES OF EXECUTIVE COUNCIL (NEW. - FOUNDLAND) JULY 7TH, 1871. [COPY.] NEWFOUNDLAND, | No. 28. - DownING STREET, 17th June, 1871. SIR:—I have the honor to enclose here with copies of the Treaty signed at Washington on May 8th by the Joint High Commissioners, which has been ratified by Her Majesty and by the President of the United States; of the Instructions to Her Majesty's High Commissioners and Protocols of the Conferences held by the Commission ; of two notes which have passed between Sir E. Thornton and Mr. Fish ; and of a despatch of even date, herewith, which I have addressed to the Governor-General of Canada, stating the views of Her Majesty’s Government on these im- portant documents. With reference to that part of my Despatch to Lord Lisgar, which bears upon the proposed arrangement for the immediate provisional ad- mission of the United States fishermen to the Colonial Fisheries, I have to observe that Her Majesty's Government are aware that under this Treaty, as under the Convention of 1854, Newfoundland is placed in a somewhat different position to that of the other Colonies interested, but they would strongly urge upon the Government of Newfoundland, that it is most desirable for the general interest of the Empire that the same Course should be pursued as in 1854, and that the application made by the United States Government should be acceded to by Newfoundland, So that American fishermen may be at once allowed, during the present season, the provisional use of the privileges granted to them by the Treaty. I have, &c., * (Signed) IKIMBERLEY. Governor HILL, C. B., &c. In compliance with the request made by the Right Hon. Earl Kim. berley, in his despatch of 17th June ultimo, to His Excellency the Governor, it is agreed to accede thereto. Correct copy. (Signed) G. D. SHEA, Clerk Ex. Council. A PPEN DIX O. STATISTICS PRODUCED ON BEEIALE OF TEIE UNITED STATES. I. Statistical Documents relating to the Fisheries and Trade in Fish be- tween the United States and British North America. I. Table showing the importations into the United States of fish of all kinds from all countries º: Free. Dutiable. Total. 1869-------------------------------------------------------- *** - - - - | * * * * * * * * * * * * 1,973, 170 1,973, 170 1870--------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2, 316,453 2,316,453 187'--------------------------------------------------|------------|------------ 2, 503, 924 2, 503, 924 1879-------------------------------------------------. 242, 429 |------------ 1,907, 688 2, 150, 117 1873-------------------------------------------------. 278, 921 |- - - - - - - - - - - - 2,806, 336 3,085,257 1874----------- tº ſº º is tº * is ſº s ºs ºs me tº s m ſº s tº gº is tº as º ºs e tº as sº * * * * * * is ºn is is s 294, 837 | 1, 536,390 | 1, 377, 300 3, 208, 527 1875-------------------------------------------------- 351,889 1,801, 217 855, 509 3,008, 615 1876-------------------------------------------------- 271, 597 1, 503, 121 878, 530 2, 653,248 II. Imports of fish and products of fish into the United States from British North America. 1867. -- - - - - tº wº gº ºn tº º gº tº ºs º gº gº º sº º ºs º ºs º ºs º ºf s tº dº tº tº º ſº ſº ſº tº ſºm º º sº tº - - - - - - tº we me e º tº dº º sº tº gº tº º is as gº $2,044, 629 1868. ------------------------------------------------------- tº me tº gº ºn tº º sº * * * 989, 344 1869.-------------------------------- tº as sº us ºf tº º ºs º ºss tº gº as ºs as s m tº sº s º ºs tº dº sº, º ºs tº dº º me ºf... - 1, 505, 299 1870------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,398,505 1871------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,383,965 1872 - - - - - * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - & sº * * * * 1,400, 173 1873------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,690, 617 1874--------- tº ºs º ºs º ºr m = ma s as es as me as sº tº tº sº tº gº tº e º ºs tº as ºr & e = * * * * * *s as º ºs ºs s as sº ºn as is ºr sº w sº us as sº sº is sº se 2, 104, 134 1875----------------- tº º sº º ºs º is sº nº º sº tº gº we as as dº ſº sº º sº tº ſº º use ºs ºs me sº sº sº tº as s as a me s sº tº ſº * * * * * - - - - 2, 348, 641 1876.--------- * = as sº ºne s m ms tº tº sº as sº tº sº me as ſº * * * * * tº º ſº º sº º ºs º ºs ºs º ºs sº º ºs ºs º ºne º sº e º 'º e º ºs º ºs tº sº. ºº e º 'º *1,862,797 1877, 9 months, to March 31.---------------------------- gº is sº sº sº e º ºs ºs º use º - - - - 1,292, 616 * The imports into the United States from British North America in 1876 appear to have been equal to §§ of the total exports from British North America for that year, which are officially reported as $5,501,221. - III. Imports of fish into the United States from British North America. Dominion of Canada. Other British Possessions in B. N. A. Dutiable. Free. Total. Dutiable. Free. Total. Tºº, B. 1869 -------------------. 1,003, 904 |.----------- 1,003, 904 || 113, 853 |....... --. 113,853 | 1, 117, 757 1870 -------------------. 1,003, 561 ------------ 1,003, 561 135, 846 |.--------. 135,846 1, 139, 407 1871 -------------------- 994, 137 ------------ 994, 137 207, 038 ...-- - - - - -. 207,038 1, 201, 175 1879 -------------------. 679, 825 220, 983 900, 808 || 340,256 21,446 || 361, 702 | 1,262, 510 1873 -------------------- 1, 108,366 258,278 1, 366, 644 232, 348 20, 429 252, 777 | 1,619, 421 1874-------------------. 32, 714 | 1,812, 188 1, 844, 902 70, 611 18, 790 89, 401 | 1,934, 303 1875 ------------- - - - - - - - 8,895 | 1, 897, 691 | 1,906, 586 6, 878 254, 123 261,001 || 2, 167, 587 1876 -------------------. 5,478 1,605, 244 1, 610, 722 46 | 167, 725 | 167, 771 1,778,493 1877 --- -------------- } 1. 213. 04 9 mos. to Mar. 31. . . . . . ; - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , 213,049 * 3352 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. i IV. ITISEI OF A.I.L. KINDS. Importations into the United States from British North America. Dutiable value. Duty. Duty saved. 1845 to 1854. For the ten fiscal years before reciprocity. Annual average----------------------------------------- 1855 to 1866. During reciprocity. Annual average 1866 to 1872. For the six fiscal years after reciprocity. Annual average * - sº sº a tº e º 'º as * * * * * * * = s tº º º ºs - - - tº s is sº * * * * * * * * * * * 1873 (fresh, 278,707)---------------------------------------- 1874 ( “ 294,815). --------------------------------------- 1875 ( “ 351,889). --------------------- ſº b \º º sº sº s = * * * * - ºr sº tº sº tº 1876 ( “ 271,597)---------------------------------------- $570, 500 00 1, 462, 875 36 1, 170, 650 00 1, 340, 714 00 1, 639,488 00 |. 1, 815,698 00 - 1, 506, 896 00 $113, 128 37 277,943 87 331, 843 00 $335, 181 00 355, 200 00 332,421 00 W. MACREREL AND HERRING..—I. Quantity and value entering into annual consumption in the United States. - Mackerel. Herring. Quantity. Value. Quantity. Value. 1868---------------------------------------------. 30, 686 bbls. $289, 175 61, 451 bbls. $288,223 1869---------------------------------------------- 27,468 “ 306, 695 91, 567 “ 425, 212 1870---------------------------------------------. 28,480 “ 291, 527 87,283 “ 398,595 1871----------------------------- sº w w = e º ºs e º 'º - * * * s m = 28,487 “ 309,074 62,022 “ 356, 759 1878.--------------------------------------------. 39, 572 “ 247, 701 62, 474 “ 332, 706 1873---------------------------------------------. 70,651 “ 523,577 63, 497 “ 352,235 { { 1874---------------------------------------------. 90, 872 “ 807,089 sº 468, 669 1875---------------------------------------------. 78,132 “ 587,349 ##!...} 580, 196 { { * 107,315 bbls. 1876---------------------------------------------. 76, 599 695,917 | jºij.s }| 550,752 VI. f MACKEREL AND HERRING...—II. Annual importation into the United States. Mackerel. Herring. Quantity. Value. Quantity. Value. 187°---------------------------------------------- 79,227 bbls. $449, 624 78,217 bbls. 384, 935 1873---------------------------------------------. 90, 889 “ 610, 457 , 692 “ 359,262 1874---------------------------------------------. 89, 693 “ 802, 470 82,551 “ 434, 565 1873---------------------------------------------. 77, 538 “ 584, 836 || 92,344 “ 515,084 1876---------------------------------------------. 76,538 “ 695, 460 | 104,812 “. 493, 090 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3353 VII. TMACKEREL AND EIERRING..—III. Annual importation into the United States from British North America. Mackerel. Herring. Quantity. "Walue. Quantity. TV alue. 1878---------------------------------------------. 77,731 bbls. $438,410 64, 200 bbls. $225, 144 1873---------------------------------------------. 89, 698 “ 605,778 53,039 “ 179, 377 1874---------------------------------------------- 89, 693 “ 802,470 63, 931 “ 229, 522 1873---------------------------------------------- 77,488 “ 584, 353 72, 167 “ 295, 924 # * - * * * * * * * * s = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *s as as s tº es e s as as ºn e º 'º - m ms 76,538 “ 695,460 87,773 “ 307, 384 rine months to March 31...................... } 37, 190 “ 336,582 53,306 “ 186,955 VIII. IMACEQEREL. Imports into the United States from British North America. TV alue. Tuty. Duty saved. 1848 to 1854. - ~ For the seven fiscal years before reciprocity, annual average. . $429, 898 28 $85,979 65 |.----------- 1855 to 1866. z During reciprocity. Annual average.--...----. • * * * * * * * * * * * * * | * - - - - - as sº º is s = e s ] as sº tº º – º ºs º- º - - ſº - e i wº E tº ſº º tº º ºs ºs º 'º - After reciprocity. 1867 ---------------------------------------------------------- 675,986 00 | 155,006 00 |............ 1868 ---------------------------------------------------------- 364,429 00 83, 310 00 |.----------- 1879 -------------------------------- *------------------------- 438,410 00 155, 462 00 |.----------- 1878 ---------------------------------------------------------. 605,778 00 179,396 00 |- - - - - - - - - - - - Annual average ---------------------------------------. 521, 151 00 143,294 00 ||------------ 1874. Bbls. 89,693--------------------------------------------- 802, 470 00 ||-----...--...--. $179, 386 00 187 “ 77,488--------------------------------------------- 584, 353 00 ||-------------. 154, 976 00 1876 “ 76,538--------------------------------------------. 695, 460 00 ||-------------. 153,076 00 Annual average ---------------------------------------- 694,094 00 |.------------. $162,479 00 33.54 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. º se • • • • • • ſ） → → → • • • • w wę w ſes œ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • → ← → § • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • * 00 #0g ‘0gI * * * * * * * * * * * * 9LRI Oļ gĮSI 00 0Ğý ‘0ſ. 00 g#838 00 80ſ, '&$ • • • • • • • • • • • • glº I og 993I - - - - - - - - - - - - 993 I Oq gg3I · · · · · · · · · · · - ggº I og 6țSI sírova I.Av Ivn NN v 00 00% ‘66€$ 90waelº†08 ‘IŤ6 '$$ 00 000 ºg ÞTË 6I 80g ‘60IĘ 86 gŁ6 ‘60ſ. “IĘ •■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • • • • • → → • • • • • • � • • • • • • • → ← → •■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • • • • • • • • •■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■> «» º «） s & æ æ ， æ æ ， æ æ， ø 00 000 ºgțI · <■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ æ, æ æ ， æ æ • ， ， ， ） ★ ★ → ← → § ¶ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • « • ！» º «ae º es & e && ！= ） • • w ««; • • • • • • • • • • → å æ z-—’--— 00 || 9& 097909 ºſôI 69 gț¢ $. 00 31888 90 613||8|| 00 80ſ ſgſ 00 089 98 00 936 "I • • • • • • • • •ſi ） ， ** * * • • • • • • • • ► ► ► = ± • • • • • • • • • ！ ） ■ ■ ■ ■ 00 ggg ſººſ 00 g63||98 86 8Ț3 '&$ ∞ √ √ √ √ √ √≠ √≠ ≤ ∞， ∞; ∞， ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • × ± • • æ, , ， ， ， ， ， ！ • • • • • • • ſ） ） ） ） = & æ ， æ æ æ æ æ æ æ æ æ § © ® ° æ æ ø ¬ ø ± • → *, «■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ * & * * * *） ≤ ∞ & æ æ， ， ， si tae ae → → → ∞， ∞; ∞, ∞; ∞, ∞ ("pºļguuļļS3) pº Aes ÁqmCI *Á qmCI ("pºļguuņsę) pēAes ÁgnGI "ÁgmCI 'ºmItſ A ('pºqgūIļņ89) pº A8$ ÁņmCI “[8]0，T, 'puſ'e (SI p.IBAApGI 90LIȚIEI ºp04.łºſu F \!\,10N Ț8ņķīgſ \u04f u04809 fo !.(0,± 0\\ 0ņu! 84.10ďu! 10.10400MI, 00 £I3Ķīj::::::.gſ.81 00 099] ]] 318, 9} 998|| 00 083 '& " " " " " * * * * * 999I Qļ gg8I 00 gg8$ • • • • • • • • • • ggQT 04 Lſ 3I 00 L&# ‘g93 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 9LSI Oļ gr.3p - - - - - - - - - - - - - - glº I og 993I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 993L og gggI Ag 931. ºg03$ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * g.g81 0ą gł8] 00 998 ‘LLI 00 138 ‘ōſō Ķ 00 00', '&$ （ 18 010'#$ 9g 090 ‘9g$ 00 00g '&gºģ gg && '101$ †), 19）, 'glº '!'）; «■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 00 001, ºg • • • • œ œ • • • • • • æ æ Œ œ œ •• • • • § €） & æ æ æ æ ææ æ） * ſ- ， ， ， ， ， ， ） → ！ ± √≠ ≤ ∞， ∞; ∞， ∞ → = 00 6 00 £89 ºg Ig 898 ‘IŞ • ！… ， ， ， ， ， º， ） − ， ！ • • • • • • § ù •• • • 00 giº'ſ 00 93 00 106||6 00 610 '93 • • • • • • •■ ■ ■ ■ ■ *- 9g IŤ8 ‘9$ • • • • æ ， æ æ ， æ æ æ æ ， «）， t） *） ≤ ∞） × ≤ ≥ ± − × ÷ ← → • • 00 00g '&gģğ *= 00 0ț8 ‘68 †3 603 %98 [8gli ſoiſs * w * • • • → = æ ø •• • • • • • • 00 £30 ſig 00 19ý ’808 00 ſig ſºg 00 688 ’ț88 00 13), ‘063 00 g6 Iºff90 ‘I 00 880 ‘IÓ0 ºg .ſ. g98 ‘LÇ0 '&$ ,, º ~~~~~ · 91RȚ ----------- gigt 90-ų • • • • • • • glº I ----------- gigt , , * * * * * * * 91.9I , , * * * * * * * g） 3L ,, º * * * * * * #1.9I 90.IŲ · · · · · · · 913 I · · · · · · · ---- gigt **** ŌL8I 0ļ999I 90āŲ998I 04 gggI * * * * gg8[0] 6ſ9T ‘ “ ’ ” gg8L 04 139I **** 9.g81 0ļgſgȚ *Á qmCI ººmſe A ("pºļietūņsø) p9A8$ ÁqmCI *Á qmCI ‘‘ampe A ºpū’ēIpum0JAA0N 'epºgueO • ►wa， 'XI Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3355 X. f º - STATEMIENT OF . DUTY SAVED ON FISH OILS IMPORTED INTO THE UNITED STATES FROM RRITISH NORTH AMERICA. Dutiable Value. 1874--------------------------------------------- $91,944 1876 --------------------------------------------- 147, 485 1876 --------------------------------------------- 72, 438 Duty Saved. $311,867 —20 per cent., $62,373 40 XI. PORT OF BOSTON. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * = e *** *-* $20,791 13 Importation of fish of all kinds from British North America during the calendar years 1845 to 1876. * Value. Duty. 1845 to 1855. For ten years prior to the reciprocity treaty, fraction of year deducted. Annual average------------------------------------------------- $333, 932 14 || $67,533 31 Smallest year, 1846 ----------------------------------------------------------- 127,642 82 33,436 07 Targest year, 1854 ------------------------------------------------------------ 609, 270 00 | 123,383 00 1855 to 1866. During reciprocity. Annual average. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 853, 914 62 1866 to 1875. For nine years after the termination of treaty, fraction of year deducted. Annual average------------------------------------------------. 796, 732 55 | 101,066 72 For the year 1876.------------------------------------------------------------- 654, 366 00 XII. FORT OF BOSTON. Importation of fish-oil from British North America during the calendar years 1845 to 1876. * Value. Duty. 1845 to 1855. For ten years prior to the reciprocity treaty, fraction of year deducted. Annual average. -----------------------------------------------. $40,686 95 $8,152 72 Smallest year, 1845.----------------------------------------------------------. 551 00 82 65 Largest year, 1852.-------------------------------------------------------.... - . . 242, 981 00 || 48, 596 20 Annual average, omitting 1852.---------------------------------------------- 18, 209 83 3, 659 01 1855 to 1866. During reciprocity. Annual average. -----...----....... . . . . . . . . 138,273 36 1866 to 1875. For nine years after the termination of treaty, fraction of year deducted. Annual average ------------------------------------------------. 110,014 00 17,468 21 For the year 1876 - - - - - - - - - - - -------------------------------------------------- 46, 811 00 2 XIII. Eacport of fish from the United States to British North America. Domestic. Foreign. Total. 1867 -------------------------------------------------------------------- $51,789 || $17,379 $69,168 1868 -------------------------------------------------------------------- 20, 38 11, 944 32, 331 1869 -------------------------------------------------------------------- 23, 353 17, 218 40, 57.1 1870 -------------------------------------------------------------------- 47,602 39, 764 87, 366 1871 ------------------------------------------------* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 38,077 86,006 124,083 1879 -------------------------------------------------------------------- 31, 043 37,050 68,093 1873 -------------------------------------------------------------------. 13,672 66, 053 79, 725 1874-------------------------------------------------------------------- 32,089 51, 736 83, 825 1875 -------------------------------------------------------------------. 41, 740 25, 131 66, 871 1876 -------------------------------------------------------------------- 150,251 24, 648 174, 899 1877, 9 mos. to Mch. 31.------------------------------------------------. 120, 235 1,029 121, 264 - $948, 196 Add for difference in returns in 1870.------------------------...------------------------ 92 - - $948, 288 Deduct for difference in returns in 1875. -----------------------------------------...--. 3 $948, 285 3356. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. XIV. Exports of fish from the United States to the Dominion of Canada and to the other provinces of B. N. America. Canada. Other provinces, B. N. A. - - Total. Foreign. |Domestic. Total. | Foreign. |Domestic. Total. 1867 ----------------------------|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|-------. $69,168 1868 ----------------------------|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|-------. 32, 331 1869 -------- * = • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 16, 311 | 19,999 || 36,310 907 3,354 4, 261 | "40, 57.1 1870 ---------------------------- 38,288 || 41,423 79, 711 1,476 6, 271 7, 747 87, 458 1871 ---------------------------. 84, 821 || 33, 564 118, 385 1, 185 4, 513 || 5, 698 || 124,083 1872 ---------------------------- 34,499 20, 467 54,966 2, 551 10, 576 13, 127 68,093 1873 ---------------------------- 63, 527 6,452 69,979 2, 526 7, 220 9, 746 79, 725 1874---------------------------. 48,847 30, 286 79, 133 2,889 1, 803 || 4, 692 83, 825 1875 ---------------------------- 18, 897 36,591 55, 488 6,231 5, 149 || 11, 380 66, 868 1876 ---------------------------. 24,074 142, 901 | 166,975 574 7, 350 7,924 174,899 1877, 9 months to March 31 -----|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|-------. 121, 264 $948, 285 XV. - PRODUCT of THE AMERICAN FISHERIES ExCEPT THE WHALE. 1870 ------------------------------------------------------- 5,313,967 1871 --------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11, 482, 410 1872 ------------------------------------ # = sm is sº us a m = m, as ºs º ºs ºs e º is sº me 9, 526,647 1873 --------- e º ºs º ºr me ºf s = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 8, 348, 185 1874------------------------------------------------------- 9, 522, 553 1875 ------------------ tº sº sº º ºs º ºs e º ºs º ºs º ºs º ºs e º 'º as a sº sey- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10, 747, 579 1876 ------------------------ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 10, 545, 871 Annual Average ------------------------------------------- 9,355, 316 XVI. YIELD AND WALUE OF THE CANADIAN FISHERIES. The following figures are taken from the annual reports of the Canadian Minister of Marine and Fisheries. 1870. ---- • Estimate ------------- tº sº sº me as e º ºs s s so e º ºs sº tº tº e º as ºs s as m sº ºne e 7,000,000 1871------ do.” ---------------------------------------- 8,000,000 1872, - - - - - Return --------------------------2- - - - - - - - - gº tº e º ºs º ºs 9, 570,116 1873.---- - do. -------- • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 10,754,988 1874----- - do. ------------------------------------- . ---. I1,681, 886 1875. ----- do. ------ tº gº º ºs º ºs s as as sº * * ſº º sº e s is sº ºne º gº º sº º ſº sº sº se e º sº tº * * * 10, 347,886 1876.- - - - - do. ------ tº tº º ºs º º gº as º ºs º ºs º ºs º sº º tº º º ºs º ºs º ºs º ºs º ºs º is sº ºn me as tº 11,019, 451 * See report for 1871, page 60. XVII. Exports of fish from British North America. a .* Total ex- |To the United ports. States. 1870------------------------------------------------------------------------- $3, 608, 549 1871 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3,994, 275 1873------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4, 348, 508 1873------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4, 779, 277 1874------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5,292, 368 $1,616, 663 1875. ------------- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * as tº as a sº s = ºs ºs e º as we sº as a sº ºr se s = e as sº as as sº tº m is º e s = sm ºr a sm a 5, 380, 527 1,641,828 1876-------------------------------------------------------------- e = * = * * * * * * * 5, 501, 221 1, 475, 330 MACKEREL. - 1875, six months, ended Dec. 31---------------------------------------------- 475, 280 405,638 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3.357. XVIII. Table showing the statistics of the manufacture of menhaden oil and guano in the United States in the years 1873, 1874, 1875, 1876. 1873. 1874. 1875. 1876. •No. of factories in Operation ... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 62 64 60 64 No. of Sail-vessels employed.----------------. 383 283 304 320 No. of steam-vessels “ -----------------. 20 25 39 46 |No. of men employed in fisheries ---------. . . . . 1,009 87.1 ! --------------|------------ No. of men employed in factories - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 1, 197 1, 567 --------------|------------ Total number of men employed. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2, 306 , 2,438 2, 633 2, 758 Amount of capital invested.--------------...-. $2,388,000 $2,500 000 $2,650, 000 $2,750, 000 No. of fish taken. -----------------------------. 397, 700,000 || 492, 878,000 || 563, 327,000 || 512,450,000 { { § { § { (estimated in barrels) - - - - - - -. 1, 193, 100 1,478, 634 1,887,767 1, 535, 885 No. of gallons of oil made---------------------. 2, 214,800 3,372,837 2,681, 487 2, 992, 000 No. of tons of guano made --------------------. 36,299 50,976 53,625 51, 245 No. of gallons of oil held by manufacturers at - the end of the year -------------------------. 484,520 648,000 125,000 264,000 No. of tons of guano held by manufacturers at the end of the year -------------------------. 2,700 5, 200 1,850 7, 275 Value of oil at 370 ----------------------------. $819,476 $1,247, 950 $992, 140 $1,107,040 Value of guano at $11-------------------------. $399, 199 $560, 736 | $589,875 $503, 695 Total value of manufactured products ... --...--. $1,218,675 $1,808, 686 $1,582,015 $1,670, 735 Total number of menhaden annually taken on the coast of the United States, estimate 750,000,000. In 1874 one company, on the coast of New Jersey, put up 30,000 dozen boxes of menhaden in oil, under the name of “American sardines,” the value of which was, at least, $90,000. On the coast of New England thirty-five decked vessels, and numerous small ones, engage in the bait fishery, the catch of which approximates 100,000 barrels annually, worth from $100,000 to $130,000. I, Hamilton Andrews Hill, of Boston, in the County of Suffolk and Commonwealth of Massachusetts, being duly sworn, do hereby depose and declare that I was Secretary of the Boston Board of Trade from 1867 to 1873, and of the National Board of Trade of the United States from its organization in 1868 to 1873, during which time I was con- stantly engaged in studying the trade of the United States and other countries, and have had much experience in compiling statistics, and that I have compiled the series of tables hereto annexed relating to the fisheries and the trade in fish between the United States and British North America, and that they are correct to the best of my belief. These tables are numbered from one (1) to seventeen (17) respectively, Num- bers (1) one to (8) eight and (10) ten and (13) thirteen to (15) fifteen, were compiled from the annual volumes on Commerce and Navigation issued by the Bureau of Statistics at Washington, and from Special tables relating to the Fisheries and the Fish trade, prepared under the direction of Dr. Young, Chief of that Bureau. Number nine (9), eleven (11) and twelve (12) were compiled from state- ments made up at the Custom House in Boston. Number sixteen (16) was made up from the Annual Reports of the Canadian Minister of Ma- rine and Fisheries. Number seventeen (17) is imperfect, and the figures which it contains have been taken from such Canadian authorities as I have had access to, and from Official Reports furnished to the State Department at Washington by the Consul General of the United States at Montreal, and the American Consul at Halifax. Number two (2) shows the annual importation of Fish and fish pro- ducts into the United States from British North America, from 1867 to 1877. Number seventeen (17) gives partial returns of the Exports of the same commodities from British North America to the United States. It will be noticed that in the corresponding years, the values returned in the Canadian tables of fish exported to the United States are not the equivalent to those given in the American tables of fish imported from 3358 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Canada, as it might seem that they should be. This, however, is in concordance with what is usually observable in comparing the trade re- ports of any two countries with each other. The export returns of the one always vary from the import returns of the other, and usually the value of the former appears as less than that of the latter. The reason for this is that the returns of exports are usually made up from ships manifests and similar documents, often hastily and imperfectly made up; but on the arrival of a cargo at its destination, when it becomes an import, and perhaps liable to duty, it is carefully and specifically reported upon Custom House entries with complete invoice attached. The re- turns of the authorities in the importing country are generally accepted therefore, as showing the true course of trade. Number four (4) shows the amount saved in duties on fish imported into the United States from Canada, under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, to average annually for the three years 1874 to 1876, about three hundred and forty thousand dollars ($340,000.00.) These figures are the result of careful estimates. Numbers thirteen (13) and fourteen (14) show the American exports of Fish, of both domestic and foreign production to the Dominion of Can- ada, and to the other Provinces of British North America, from 1867 to 1877. These returns will be found to vary from the corresponding returns of Canadian import, (which do not appear at all in these tables) very much more than the American returns of imports vary from the Canadian returns of exports, to which reference has already been made, and for the additional reason that a very large part of the fish sent from the United States into Canada, goes by rail, and is not reported at all at any American Custom House, while it is of course entered at a Can- adian Custom House, as soon as it has crossed the frontier. Numbers thirteen (13) and fourteen (14) show the value of fish taken out of bond in the United States to be exported to Canada, and that which is shipped by vessels clearing at American ports. I have marked With my name the several volumes and returns used in the preparation of these tables, and the same are certified to by Alfred D. Foster, Notary Public, before whom my oath to this affidavit is made. (Signed) - HAMILTON ANDREWS HILL. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSESTS, | Boston, June 8th, 1877. SUFFOLK, S. S. - - Then personally appeared the above named, Hamilton Andrews Hill, and made Oath that all the foregoing statements by him subscribed are true of his own personal knowledge, except so far as they depend upon information and belief, and those he believes to be true, before me, (Signed) - ALFRED D. FOSTER, •r Notary Public. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3359 II. Numbers and Tonnage of Vessels of the United States employed in the Cod and Mackerel Fisheries from 1866 to 1876, inclusive. APPENDIX O. II. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, REGISTER’s OFFICE, Washington, D.C., September 5th, 1877. PURSUANT to Section 886 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, I, W. P. Titcomb, Acting Register of the Treasury Department, do hereby certify that the annexed is a correct statement of the tonnage of the United States employed in the cod and mackerel fisheries in the years indicated, as shown by the records of this office. - W. P. TITCOMB, Acting Register. BE IT REMEMBERED, That W. P. Titcomb, Esq., who certified the annexed transcript, is now, and was at the time of doing so, Acting Register of the Treasury of the United States, and that full faith and credit are due to his official attestations. I IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I, John Sherman, Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, have, hereunto subscribed my name, and caused to be affixed the Seal of this Department, at the City of Washington, this fifth day of September, in the year of our Lord 1877. [L. S.] JOHN SHERMAN, Secretary of the Treasury. STATEMENT shewing the number and tonnage of vessels of the United States employed in the cod and mackerel fisheries from 1866 to 1876, inclusive:- Wessels above 20 Wessels under 20 tons. t;OnS. Total. Years. No. Tons. No Tons. No Tons. 1866 (new adm't) ------------------|---------. 42, 796, 28 |- - - - - - - - - - 8, 343, 88 |---------. 51, 140, 16 1866 (old adm't) -------------------|----------|------------|---------- 503, 88 |---------. 503, 88 1867 -----------------------------|---------. 36, 708, 62 - - - ... ---. 7, 858, 04 |. -- - - - - - - 44, 566, 66 1868. -----------------------------. 1, 467 74, 762, 92 753 9, 123, 95 1, 220 83, 886, 87 1869. ------------------------------ 1,093 55, 165, 43 621 || 7, 538, 82 1, 714 || 62, 704, 25 1870--------------. ---------------. 1,561 82,612, 27 731 8,847, 72 2, 292 91, 459, 99 1871------------------------------- 1, 563 82, 902, 43 863 9, 963, 04 2, 426 | 92, 865, 47 1872. ------------------------------ 1,486 || 87, 403,08 899 || 10, 143, 48 2, 385 | 97, 546, 56 1873------------------------------- 1, 558 99, 541, 58 895 || 9, 976, 73 2,453 | 109, 518, 31 1874------------------------------. 1, 230 68,489, 62 869 9, 800, 39 2,099 78,290, 01. 1875. -----------------------------. 1, 259 | 68,703, 16 929 11, 503, 52 2, 188 80,206, 68 1876------------------------------- 1,383 77, 313, 92 928 10,488, 21 2, 311 87, 802, 13 3360 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. III. Statistics prepared by Mr. Goode. III. - I, George Brown Goode, of the City of Washington, in the District of Columbia and United States of America, being duly sworn, do depose and say that I am the Assistant Curator of the United States National Museum, and for the last eight years I have been engaged in studying the natural history and habits of the fishes of the North Atlantic Coast, and during the last six years I have been an assistant to the United States Fish Commission, and during that time it has been part of my employment to collect and arrange statistics as to the amount of the fish taken on the coast of the United States, that the tables hereto an- nexed were compiled from statistics and returns made from the differ- ent fishing towns of the Northern Atlantic States to the United States Fish Commission, and that the same are true to the best of my knowl- edge and belief; that the prices stated of the various kinds of fish, are actual prices as paid for said fish in Fulton Market, New York City,+ that the table marked XVIII, (see Part I, Appendix O), entitled: “Table Showing Statistics of the Manufacture of Menhadden Oil and Guano in the United States, in the years 1873, 1874, 1875, 1876,” was also compiled by me from the returns of the United States Fish Com- mission, and that the same is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. - GEORGE BROWN GOODE. PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA, COUNTY OF HALEFAX, ss.' HALIFAx, October 10th, 1877. Then personally appeared the above-named George Brown Goode, and made oath that the foregoing affidavit, by him subscribed, is true to the best of his knowledge and belief, before me, - - L. G. POWER, Notary Public. BSTIMATED TOTAL OF AMERICAN FISHERIES For 1876. Consolidated table of sea-fisheries east of Cape May. -----...------------- 13,030, 821 Lake fisheries in 1872 (Milner).---------------------------------------- 1,600,000 Products of whalefishery---------------------------------------------- 2,737, 379 $17,368,200 This is exclusive of all river fisheries; of the river fisheries of sal- mon, shad, alewives and striped bass; of the coast fisheries south of Delaware Bay (Mullet, Bluefish, Menhadden, etc.); of all the Pacific coast fisheries, (salmon, cod, haddock, etc.); of the shell-fish (oysters, clams, etc.); of the Crustaceans (lobsters, crabs, etc.); of sponges, of AWARD OF THE FISEIERY COMMISSION. 3361 skins, of fur, and other seals, and of their oil. For these thirty millions of dollars ($30,000,000) is considered to be a reasonable estimate. WEIRS AND TRAPS. - Men. South side of Cape Cod.----. ------------------------------------ 23 88 Martha's Vineyard Sound ---------------------------------------- 9 36 Buzzard's Bay--------------------------------------- • - - - - - - - - - - - 30 90 Block Island---------------------------------------------- ------ 3 12 Narragansett Bay -------------------- --------------------------- 30 210 Fykes ---------------------------------------------------------- 100 * 14 3362 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. PRODUCTS of Marine Fisheries INSHORE FISHERIES, Or Fisheries Conducted from the Shore. 3 | Wholesale | 3 | Retail g Mean Pounds. # alue. º Value. ‘E Value. A- P+ PH Flounders and Flatfish. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1, 827,000%| 4 73,080%| 8 146, 160*| 6 109, 620% Eſalibut (fresh). ---------------- * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * tº sº tº º ºs ºs º ºs tº se gº º = ºs s sº I & s = as as sº es as as sº as ºr i sº tº as e i s m º ºs º ºs e tº as sº ºn at {{ “ New York--------------------------|. * = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * | * * * * i s m as as is ºn as s = as ºn as I as as as * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . (cured) Gloucester, &c., flitches.|- - - - - -...----. * * * 1 sº º sº tº gº ºs ºs e º ſº gº º f e * = sº I s = * * * * * * * * * * : * * * : * = * = s. sº tº ºn as sº as a IlS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - tº gº & sº ſº tº ºs tº * = tº º ºs ºs º f * & sº a s º º sº º ºs sº wº º º sº us | * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * “ napes--------------------------|------------|- . . . ]------------|- * = tº # => tº gº sº gº ºs º sº º ºs ºº & 5 sº se * s tº tº gº º sº me sº s as sº is Cod (fresh) New York ----------------. | 5,000, 000 || 5 250,000 || 8 400,000 || 64; 325,000 “ “ Gloucester, Boston, &c...... 20,000, 000"| 3 600,000 || 5 | 1,000, 000 || 4 800,000 “ cured ----------------------------- 28, 480,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - s sº sº, º f is sº ºn gº tº me * * * * * #| 379,733 | “ roes. ------------------------------ 80,000 || 1 800 24 1, 800 1; 1, 300 | Tomcod-------------------------------- 100,000 || 3 3,000 || 8 8,000 53. 5, 500 Cunner -------------------------------- 250, 000 3 7, 500 || 5 12, 500 || 4 10,000 Tautog -------------------------------- 615, 550 8 49, 244 15 92, 332 11% 70,788 Mackerel º s º ºs e º is ºs º ºs º E & Gº tº E = E = tº sº º tº º 3,481,000 || 8 278, 480 15 522, 150. 113 400, 315 “ Culled - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * = * * : * * * = º ºs º ºs s m = ± tº º º & º 'º - sº º º Aº º ºr sº *s tº tº as sº I as sº as as sº * * * * * * * Spanish Mackerel.--------------------- 105,000 || 25 26, 250 30 31, 500 273 28,875 Bonito --------------------------------. 2, 200,000 5 110,000 || 8 176,000 6} 143,000 JPompano ------------------------------ 5,000 || 60 3,000 |100 5,000 | 80 4,000 Swordfish.------------------------------ 1, 500,000 || 7 105,000 15 225,000 11 165,000 Butterfish, Whiting, White Perch------ 50,000 || 4 2,000 || 8 4,000 || 6 3,000 Sea Robins----------------------------. 90,000 2 1, 800 3 2,700 2. 2, 250 Squeteague ---------------------------- 1, 727, 600 || 6 103,656 10 172, 760 | 8 138, 208 ingfish ------------------------------- 10,000 15 1, 500 || 25 2, 500 20 2,000 Spot and Croaker ---------------------. 75,000 5 3, 750 | 10 7, 500 | 73 5, 625 Sheepshead ---------------------------- 75,000 | 15 11, 250 | 20 15, 000 17; 13, 125 Soup. ---------------------------------- 7, 760, 000 || 05 388,000 || 8 620, 800 6%| 504, 400 Sea Bass - - - - - - - * = & E * * * * * * * * = E = E = sº dº sº e º 'º ºf 598, 500 || 10 59, 850 | 15 89, 775 | 12% 74, 812; Striped Bass --------------------------- 123, 200 | 15 18, 480 | 20 24, 640 173 21, 560 Bluefish-------------------------------- 7,068, 000 4 282, 720 | 8 565, 440 || 6 424, 080 Smelt ---------------------------------- 400,000 || 10 40,000 | 15 60,000 12% 50, 000 Menhaden ----------------------------- 224, 834,000 ||--|--|------------ * * * * | * * * tº E s m =- - - - - - - - I - - - - - - - - - - - - Tels ----------------------------------- 250,000 | 12 30, 000 18 45,000 | 15 37, 500 Sturgeon------------------------------- 75,000 5 3,750 10 7, 500 | 73, , 625 Sea Shad. ------------------------------ 3, 770, 200 5 188,510 || 7 || 282, 765 6#| 235,637; Salmon -------------------------------. 40, 100 ||--|--|------------ sº as e a sº * * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Alewife-------------------- § ºm ſº as tº s ºf s = º as a 7, 385,000 | # 36,925 | 1 73, 850 # 55, 38.7% Herring ------------------------------- 1,604, 800 2 32,096 4 64, 192 3 48, 144 { { (cured) ... -- tº as * * * * * * = s = me tº sº se sº sº a sº I • * * * * * * * * * * * | * sº gº is sº º ºs sº as s = ºs º ºs º ºs sº sº ſº I gº ºs as m tº gº ºn tº ſº m a tº tº gº as s I s = ºn s as ºs is a wº sº * * d 319, 579, 950 $2,710, 641 $4,658,864 $4,064,484 Patio to mile of coast line. ------. 287, 392 |----|------------ s as as e is as in m = is “ - s = < * $3, 655 (1,112) N. B.—The cured cod have been restored to their green weight (three times as much). mackerel have been restored to their green weight (one-sixth additional). The salted AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 33.63 of Northern Atlantic States. OFFSHORE FISHERIES, Or Fisheries Conducted in large vessels, principally over Twenty Tons. Aggregate of | Aggregate of Weights. Values, 3 | Wholes’le | 3 | Retail 3 Mean Pounds. # "V.” | #| W. É W. ſh- P+ ſh- 4- - - - - - - tº - - - - I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1, 827,000 109, 620 12, 339,000 4 493, 560 | 15 1, 850, 850 | 9%| 1, 172, 205 |- - - - - - - - - -...--- 1, 172,205) * 1,000, 000 || 10 100,000 | 15 150,000 | 12}| 125,000 |.----........... 125,000 || 8, 476,000 || 2 | 169, 520 - - - || 302 500 | . . . . . 236,010 |................ 236,010 X | $1,546,240 200, 000 || 5} 10, 500 7#| 15, 000 6%. 12, 750 |. --- - - - - -...----. 12, 750 | 10,000 || 23, 250 300 2; 275 22, 025,000 275 4s sº sº ºn m is s ºn tº ºs º- e. * * * | * * * * * * * * * * * * | * * * * | * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * | * * * * * - * * * * * * | * *s m ms m at ºn as as º ºs ºn as we ºn wº 325,000 * = - - - - s as as - - - - - I - - - - - - - - - - - - ( - - - - I - - - - - - - - - . i - - - - I • - - - - - - - - - - - i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 800,000 160, 641, 700 ||--|--|-----------. |- - * | * * * * * s • * * --. 3, 319, 182 214, 221,700 3, 698, 915* 20, 1. 200 || 24 450 13 g’ 100,000 1, 62 • = - - - - - - - - - , * * * | * * * * * * * * * * * * | * * * * | * * * * * is a ºn as a l e º = - 1 - ſº º mº m -- ~ * * * * 100,000 5, 500 * - - - - - - - - - - - - sº m * - I - me s as m as a s as s w w i < * * * * * *w as as a s as as - * * * * * * : * * = sº ºn a ºw ºn a sº me • 250,000 10, C00 * * - - - as ºn s = - - * ºn a | * * * * * * * * * * * * | * * * * | * * * * * * * * * * | * * * * : * * * * * * * * * * * * 615, 550 70,788 2, 615,000 || 8 209, 200 15 392, 250 11}| 300, 725 6,096,000 701,040 35,632, 900 ||--|--|-----------. - - sº sº I - - - - s its sº - - - * - - - - - sº gº - - - - - se - - 35, 632, 900 1,674, 222* ºr tº sº- - - ſº sº sº º - - - tº * * * | * * * * * * * * * * * * | * * * * | * * * * * * * * * - I e º 'º - I q & s sº sa º an º' as m as * 105,000. 28,875 as as ºn as º ºs ºs e º as as e i = * * * | * as we ºn m - - m s m sº am ſ a sº sº e ſ tº ºn ºn an ºn tºs ºn a tº ºn as ºn 4 I w ſº sº º tº tº - tº its tº as wº 2, 200,000 143,000 * * - - - - - - - - - - * * * : * * *s as ºn - as º ºs’ as s ºr I sº as sº s - - - as s s = - - a 1 s = ** - I - * = * * * * * * = *, * 5, 000 4,000 e - - - - ºg º ºs - - - - - sº ---|------------T----|--|-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1, 500,000 165,000 * * * * * as sº sº tº º w = | * * * * : * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * : * * * * : * * as as * * * * * * * * 50, 000 3,000 sº º - - - - sº s = - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * : * * * * : * * * * as s m = • , i = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 90,000 2, 250 e - - - - tº ºs º ºs - - - * * * | * * * *s as - - as º as ºs e I - as a e i as ºn - se sº tº a m = } • * * * | * * * * * - - sº * is sº wº 1, 727, 600 138, 208 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * | * * * * * * * * * * * * r * * *s e w w as a ºn me • * * * r * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 10,000 , 000 & e- - - - - - - - - - - -, * * * * : * * as as as me • * * * * * | * * * * | * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 75,000 5, 625 * * * * * * * * * * * * I • * * * : * * m = m we s sº as as a m I wº as s = h m - - ºn s sº m = - * : * * * * * * * *s as tº ºn - * * s sº a 75,000 13, 125 tº ºn sº - w = e ºs e º an * * * : * * * * * * * * as a sm an I am as as a as º ºn sm as as as ~ * = | * * * * : * * * * * * * * * * * * 7, 760, 000 504; 400 tº ºs ºs º ºs tº us is as a m = | * * * * * * * * * * * 's as m = as a | * * * * * * * * m as s as as as . . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 98, 500 74, 812 * * * * * * * * * * * * : * * * * : * ºn as as sº as ºn e m = m, a * * * s h tº - m - as a sm - - - * † - - - - - sº wa = - - - - gº º - 123, 200 21, 560 * = a- - - - us sº gº - - - - se * * * * * * * sº s - - tº am as sº w - * * * : * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * | * * * * * * - º º sº tº º 7,068, 000 424, 080 * * - - - - as as am - - - * * * | * * = s. sº - ~ * = • * - I - * * * : * * * m s sº ºn as a s h is as a “ . * * * * * * * * * * * * 400, 000 50,000 478,912, 500 ||---. ------------|- * * * : - - - - tº º e - - - s * - - - - - * * - - - - - - - - 703, 746, 500 1,657, 790; 4a º sº tº E tº s ºf a sº tº ---------------|----|----------|----|-----------. 250,000 37, 500 tº º sº - ºn tº ºn me w w we e H sº * * * | * * * * * * * * * = ... • { * = * * | * * * * is t an am - a # * * * * | * * * * * * * * * * * * 75,000 5, 625 * * * * * * * * * * * * s ---|------------|----|----------|--|--|------------| 3, 770, 200 235,637 * * * - sº ºn as tº as as - e i e * * * : * * = as ºs - - as ºr me s - I - * s is I am - ºn as s m = * * * | * * * * | * * * * * - - us tº as * * 40, 100 8, 020 * * - - - * * * * - - * * * | * * * * * * * * * *m as as I - * * * | * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * | * * * * * * * * * * * * 7, 385,000 55, 387 4,000,000 ----|------------|- * * * || - - - - s sº tº º - s * - - - - * * * - - - - sº sº sm - 5, 604, ;: 48, 144 * - - - - * tº º - - - - - as ---------------|----|---4------|--|--|-----------. 22,328, 700 459, 833* \ 1,045, 855, 750 $13,030, 821 tº sº - - - - - - - - - - s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 940, 510 $11,718 * From Report of Bureau of Statistics. f From official reports. 3364 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. CUSTOM-House, BOSTON, MASS., Collector's Office, October 9th, 1877. Statement of the importations of mackerel into the port of Boston, January 1st, 1877, to Sep- tember 30th, 1877. Nova scoutºnew Bruns- Prince Edward Island. From. i te - Bbls. Value. Bbls. TV alue. 1877. January -------------------------------- 3,867 $42,521 00 --------------|-------------- ; February ------------------------------- 858 7,685 00 --------------|-------------- March ---------------------------------- 587; 5, 720 00 --------------|-------------- April ----------------------------------- 5 3900 --------------|-------------- May ------------------------------------ 517; 3, 18800 || -------------|-------------- June ------------------------------------ 4,730 28, 626 00 60 $308 00 July ------------------------------------ 5, 97.2% 31, 235 00 611 3, 146 00 4-ugust --------------------------------- 6, 151#. 44, 375 00 7, 517 63,222 00 *Wiember ------------------------------ 13, 886; 114,952 00 6, 3613; 66, 001 00 tº º sº * * * * * * * tº gº º ºs ºs º ºs º º is gº us as ºr e º ºs º is e g sº s 36,576 $278, 341 00 14, 549; $132, 677 00 T- No importations of Imackerel from Newfoundland. BOSTON CUSTOM-HOUSE, Oollector's Office, October 17, 1877. I hº fºrus the foregoing statements to be true, as appearing upon the º,§ this office. L. S. - * -º-º-º- & KE, Asst. Dept. Oollector. IV. Statement taken from the Books of Gloucester Firms,-produced by Mr. Babson,-filed by Mr. Foster on October 24, 1877, and objected to by the British Counsel as not being properly verified, and therefore inadmissible as evidence, but admitted by Commissioners for what it may be worth. I, BENJ. F. BLATCHFORD, an Inspector of Customs, for the Dis. trict of Gloucester, on oath, do depose and say, that at the request of Hon. Dwight Foster, I visited the fishing firms of this city, and re- quested from them a statement, taken from their books, of the number of Vessels employed in the Bay of St. Lawrence mackerel fisheries, and the number of Bay mackerel packed by them each year, from 1866 to 1877. Also the same statistics in regard to the United States shore mackerel fishery, and annexed I send a true copy of their several re- ports made to me marked A, B, &c. - BEN.J. F. BLATCHFORD. MASSACEIUSETTS, ESSEx, SS. Personally appeared, said Blatchford, who made oath to the truth of the above affidavit. Before me, *: AARON PARSONS, Justice of the Peace. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3365 David Low & Co.'s statement. +jº &H P.": op": º : | | | #3 āś º F-st C. : tº $2 dº Q cº ad cº Years § Fº % g ‘gº -: e *3 §: 3 § s & º C tº- 02 . Sº . 92 pººl * | | | . ## ## # 2. Ž ää ää H 1866 --------------------------------------------------- 5 3 1,249 1, 379 2, 628 1867 --------------------------------------------------- 4 2 1. 068 929 1,997 1868 --------------------------------------------------- 6 4 17 835 1, 752 1869 --------------------------------------------------- 9 8 1, 867. 2, 463 4, 330 1870 --------------------------------------------------- 7 7 1, 203 3, 610 4, 813 1871 --------------------------------------------------- 4 6 1,096 2,726 3,822 1872 --------------------------------------------------. 3 4 460 1,498 1, 958 1873--------------------------------------------------. 8 3 1, 944 1, 338 3, 282 1874--------------------------------------------------- 4 3 1, 328 2, 977 4, 305 1875 --------------------------------------------------- 1 4 205 2,258 2, 463 1876 -------------------------------------------------- 0 4 | None - - - 4, 775 4, 775 2, 293 1877 ------------, -------------------------------------- 2 4 310 1, 983 } to Oct. 18 Certified to as correct. Before me this 19th Oct., 1877. ADDISON CARTER, Special D. C. A.—Leighton & Co.'s statement. They fit 18 vessels. :* "3 | "…, º ºr; # E. % £ + š 5 Years. § 3 SP 3 © ºld ‘sº º P. E. © CD &#– tº-: Gº ... : ... º Ç O gº 8 23 F. Ç es 3. º 2. 2, fa P 1868----------------------- * = a = * * * * * * * * = • - - - - - - - - s = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * = 5 5 | 1,330 953 1869.------------------------------------------------------------- 7 9 2,075 1, #; 1870-------------------------------------------------------------- 6 6 1, 616 2, 47 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 10 6 3, 105 2, 177 1872.----, -------------------------------------------------------- 6 4 2,465 1,917 1873-------------------------------------- * = sm ºn tº es sº as as s m = ± s = * * * * * * * * * 11 5 4, 657 1, 634 #:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: #| || 1: #; o- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1876.------------------------------------------------------------- 1 5 134 5,555 1877. ----------------------------------------------------- st a • * * * * = 5 10 107 1,604 55 59 17, 142 24, 620 f B.—Pettengell & Cunningham's statement. They fit 6 vessels. B º º # ,23 ,23 * : * – CD op GD dº QP # 8. # 3 * 5 5 Years. § 3 § 3. o 4 *S.: , ch r, c. Q © &H *H Gº . c.3 ... 3 © e 2: 3 .g. 3 O C rº rº Z! 2. £3 º 1866-------------------------------------------------------------- 6 ; *::: *; 1867-------------------------------------------------------------- 4 1868. ------------------------------------------------------------- 6 ; 1, 350 } § 1869. ------------------------------------------------------------- 3 " .. 5 1870.------------------------------------------------------------ 3 5 900 1, 500 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 4 850 1,050 1872. ------------------------------------------------------------- 2 5 400 1, 500 1873.------------------------------------------------------------- 2 4 300 1, 150 1874 ------------------------------------------------------------- 1 5 150 1, 500 1875. ------------------------------------------------------------- 1 4 225 1, 380 1876. ------------------------------------------------------------- 1 5 130 1, 500 1877-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 3 200 300 3366 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. C.—Wm. Parsons, 2d, & Co.'s statement. They fit 14 vessels. 5 § 3 3, . ‘s: 2," 2 ºf . 9 $– #: # #3 #3 Years. 3 à 3 P º º: 3. : P = 35 | > 3 … à - 5 º ‘5 C So SH- O O 8 C q> 5.3 3 3 * d : ot, 9 2. 2, :* 2 : 1866-------------------------------------------------------------- 10 1. 3,087 150 1867-------------------------------------------------------------- 9 2 2, 676 420 1868-------------------------------------------------------------- 6 2 1,263 451 1869-------------------------------------------------------------- 6 2 1, 109 614 1870.------------------------------------------------------------- 5 5 1,058 2, 342 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 4 4 907 1,579 1879.------------------------------------------------------------- 2 2 562 1, 121 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- 4 || - 1. 952 425 1874-------------------------------------------------------------- 1 3 430 1,927 1875------------------------------------------------ tº a sm • * * * * * * * * * * : * * * * * * * * 3 || --------- 1, 544 1876 -------------------------------------------------------------|-------. 4 ||---------- 2, 844 1877------------------------------------------------ * * * * * * * * * me sm me • * i = as as a s = s. s 0 ----------|---------- D.—Alfred Mansfield's Statement. They fit 9 vessels. 5 || 3 || 3 | # º 2 *_. 15 – %. # 3 £ | *g cº U2 ºn Ci- Q) Q Years. g g #3 • 3 33 *H SH 32 º cº • e º; 5 3 3 C © ~ rº- 2. 2. ſº ſº 1866------------------------------------ w tº as * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * tº m ºr sm ºn a 1. 9. 105 1,045 1867-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 10 570 2,000 1868-------------------------------------------------------------- 1. 11 i07 1,900 1869-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 10 | None. - - - 2, 120 1870------------------------------------------------------------, 0 13 | None. --. 3, 426 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 7 284 1, 331 1879-------------------------------------------------------------. 0 7 | None. --. 1, 179 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- 5 4 1, 127 485 1874-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 5 1,233 2,063 1875.------------------------------------------------------------. 1. 4 89 1, 212 1876-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 2 | Nome. ... 1, 100 1877------------------------------------------------- * - ºn as as as sº as sº m 'm sº * 2 2 -------------------- E.—B. Maddock's statement. [They fit 10 vessels.] 3 a § # º 2 *... H-4 Q CD º an ºp # *. § 3 + š § Years. § 3 © C o ºd $5.3 º P, a C © C+- &H dº cº cº o e tº a .g. 3 C © cº- ~ 2. 2. £3 ſº 1866.-------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|- gºs º gº tº º - - - - - - - - - - tº ºs = - - 1867 -------------------------------------------------------------- 10 2 3, 200 1, 100 1868-------------------------------------------------------------- 7 10 1,000 2, 100 1869. ------------------------------------------------------------- 5 6 1,800 2, 350 1870----------- tº º we gº ºn tº tº º se en m * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 5 1, 500 2, 325 1871. -- ---------------------------------------------------------- 8 5 2,000 1, 350 1872. ------------------------------------------------------------- 2 4 500 1, 250 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- 5 2 1,500 650 1874-------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2 110 1, 207 1875- - ------------------------------------------------------------ 0 2 | None. -- 450 1876-------------------------------------------------------------- ^ 0 2 | None... 858 1877-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 1 | None to 350 date. Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. F.—D. C. & H. Babson’s statement. [They fit 13 vessels.] 5 || 3 || 3 | # dº Öº tº . rºi -- º º "3 ad"; 3 - a q; *— #, 5 Years. § - 35 5 § *: 3 P- rº P-, E Q ors o o a; 8 tº 3 © O º º 2. 2. ſº ſº 1866 -------------------------------------------------------------- 9 1 3, 246 356. 1867-------------------------------------------------------------. 6 3 1, 620 834 1868-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 5 475 916. 1869.------------------------------------------------------------- 6 3 904 587 1870-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 8 500 3, 115 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 6 887 1,420 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- 1 3 380 1,005 1873-------------------------------------------------------------. 4 3 1, 110 1,395 1874-------------------------------------------------------------. l 5 • 270 2,043 1879.------------------------------------------------------------. 3 5 642 1, 288 4876 ------------------------------------------------------------. a 0 6 ---------- 3,977. 1877-------------------------------------------------------------- 1 4 138 679, G.—Statement of Perking Brothers. f [They fit 9 vessels.] / .F. # 's- *:::: 2 ū) 3 # 3 & Ç * Years. § 3 § 5. * 3 rº & ...a P. E. * F. * 5 © * * • g, • 2 es es 6 $ c; $3 24 2. :* ## 1860 -------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------------------|---------- 1897--------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|----------|---------- 1868--------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|----------|---------- 1869.-------------------------. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * as as e º sº e = * * * * * * * sº º ºs e º ºs is as s is as s m = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I s as as tº ºs º gº as me as 1870-------------------------------------------------------------- .1 6 203 3,712 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 5 6 926 2,350. 187°-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 3 402 440. 1873-------------------------------------------------------------. 3 4 435 1, 315 1874-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 4 1,035 2,596 1873------------------------------------------------------------. 1 3 205 1,082 1876.------------------------------------------------------------- 3 2 211 1,655. 1877-------------------------------------------------------------. 0 2 | None.-- 520; H.—Statement of Hardy & McKenzie. [They fit 6 vessels.] .F. 5 # § tº º * #. #g Tº ## . Years. 3 : # 5 ‘s: 3.3 P & F: C o's SH C++ cº & e e g = g; a © C rº rº 2. 24 º ſº 1870-------------------------------------------------------------- 4 10 712 3,856. 1874-------------------------------------------------------------- 8 10 1, 748 3, 554 *-------------------------------------------------------------- 5 8 1, 508 2,814 *-------------------------------------------------------------- 6 4 251 3,095 *-------------------------------------------------------------- 4 3 1, 839 1,991 *-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 3 686 1, 115 *-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 2 369 1, 427 **--------------------------------------------------------------|------------- ---|---------------- º: 3368 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. I.—Statement of William C. Wonson. [He fits 8 vessels.] .F. § º # ,23 º * : * — % 3 g5 g * 8 3 tº ad ºf C++ do Q Years. SP 3 a C o, 3 ‘s; P. 3 F: Q C. &H &#- cº cº e o g = .g. 3 c O ~ •º 2. 2. ſº ſº 1866----------------- As ºn as me sº se as as s m as s as me º sº am s m ms is sº * * * * * * * * * * * tº e s sº as ºs is sº as as s = 0 4 0 722 1867------------------------------------------- * * * * g º sº gº º ºs as º ºs e sº gº tº s = 0 3 0 - 267 1868-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 2 0 262 1869------------------------------------------------------------- 2 4 301 922 1870-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 5 0 1,646 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 5 0 846 1878------------------------------------------------------------ * 3 4 818 749 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 2 492 233 1874-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 0 0 0 1875-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 0 0 0 1876-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 2 0 1,724 1877- ----------------------------+------------------------------- 0 2 0 165 J.—Statement of George Sayward. [He fits 5 vessels.] | 3 | #: º # ,23 ,23 * : * — § 3 g5 g * * Years. 3 * § 5 ‘s: +3 P- rº P #. CD C C Cº- &#– cº cº e e º; 3 .g. 3 O Ç rº rº 2. Z! ſº ſº 1866-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 1 981 71 1867 -------------------------------------------------------------. 2 1 641 171 1868-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 2 625 293 1869-------------------------------------------------------------. 3 0 279 0 1870------------------------------- tº s is sº me = * s = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *e is sº e s = 1 1 235 727 1871-------------------------------------------------------------. 2 3 513 572 1878-------------------------------------------------------------- 1 1 426 83 1873-------------------------------------------------------------. 2 0 419 0. 1874------------------------------------------------------------. 2 0 743 0. 1875-------------------------------------------------------------- 1. 0 200 0. 1876-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 0 0 0. 1877-------------------------------------------------------------- 1 . 0 0 0 K.—Statement of Daniel Sayward. [He fits 4 vessels.] .5 § º g ,23 .2 * : 3– § . § 3 g *g Years. 3 : § 3 ‘s; ‘53 P & P º C C C Sºl C4– - cº cº e o .g. 5 ... 3 © C ..º --> 24 2. £3 £3 1866-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 3 1,275 500. 1867-------------------------------------------------------------- 4 2 1,088 233 1868-------------------------------------------------------------. 3 4 501 1,007 1869-------------------------------------------------------------. 5 3 1,032 377 1870-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 6 422 1,699 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 6 3 1, 134 830 1878-------------------------------------------------------------. 4 3 373 849 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 2 549 458 1874------------------------------------------------------ * * * * * * * * 2 2 367 653 1875-------------------------------------------------------------- 1 1 91 78 1876-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 0 0 0. 2 0 0 0 Award of THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3369 L.—Statement of Frederick G. Wonson. ſºſe fits 11 vessels.] F. # º g ,23 ,23 * : 3 * Q) GD Ç an Q2 # *. # 3 + š 5 Years, § 3 3D º © rºd *::, 3 º P ºf C o's tº- tº-1 OP cº cº C C g; H º; H O es rº rº 2. 2. £3 ſo 1866-------------------------------------------------------------- 4 5 700 1, 156 1867 -------------------------------------------------------------- 4 9 785 1,391 1868-------------------------------------------------------------. 6 6 820 1,202 1869.------------------------------------------------------------. 5 7 1,411 1, 746 1870.------------------------------------------------------------ 5 8 3,883 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 6 8 1, 292 4,480 1872-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 7 3, 168 1873.------------------------------------------------------------. 4 6 980 3,332 1874-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 12 620 7,270 1875-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 10 203 3, 129 1876-------------------------------------------------------------. 0 12 || --------. 6,213 1877.------------------------------------------------------------- 1. 11 ---------, ---------- M.—Statement of Samuel Haskell. [He fits 5 vessels.] à || 3 || 3 | | # "3 # "3 º Y # ##| | #3 | ... à €3,1’S. #3 #3 °3 O º: &H C++ 32 ... 3 . CŞ O C tº 3 .g. 3 O es rº ...tº 2. 2. ſº ſa 1866-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 0 0 •0 1867-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 0 0 O 1868.------------------------------------------------------------. 2 3 550 339 1869-------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2 115 435 1870-------------------------------------------------------------. 2 3 335 604 1871-------------------------------------------------------------. 2 3 540 675 1872.-------------------------------------- * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 3 0 1, 294 1873------------------------ … ºn as me sº tº e º s = * * * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 1 672 512 1874------------------------------------------------------------- 2 2 720 1, 143 1875-------------------------------------------------------------. 0 1 0 710 1876.---------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0 1 0 1,226 1877----------------------------------------- sº is ºn s e º º sº, as * = * * * * * * * * * * 1 1 0 308 N.—Statement of Smith & Oakes. [They fit 7 vessels.] B º º g ,23 º * : 3– § # 5 g * 8. 33 P-3 & ſº Sł- q> . GO Years. g 3. g 3 C º: ‘5 º: &H *H Gºd cº cº; © O º; E .g. 3 Ç) d º ~ Z! 2. ſº ſº 1868------------------------------------------------------------- 3 2 500 520. 1869.------------------------------------------------------------- 5 5 1,010 125, 1870-------------------------------------------------------------. 4 6 663 1, 178 1871------------------------------------------------------------- 1. 2 150 530, 1872. ---- e = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * m = m as tº se as as sº sº e s sº * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0 0 0 0 1873------------------------------------------------------------- 2 0 527 0 1874-------------------------------------------------------------- 1. 0 372 0. 1875-------------------------------------------------------------. 0 () 0 0 1876.------------------------------------------------------------. 0 0 0 0 1877-------------------------------------------------------------. 0 0 0 0 3370 Award OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. O.—Statement of Samuel Lane & Bro. [They fit 8 vessels.] .5 ‘g º g CD ap) ~ © º *-i -: ºf r-5 o: § 5 g * gº Years. § 3 || 3 : ‘s: 3.3 P. 3 P-, El C o's Ci- 24 2. ſº ſº 1866-------------------------------------------------------------- 9 3 2,913 758 1867 -------------------------------------------------------------- 5 4 1, 312 956 1868. ------------------------------------------------------------- 6 2 689 197 1869. ------------------------------------------------------------- 3 4 619 1, 780 1870-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 6 512 4, 240 1871. ------------------------------------------------------------- 3 5 1,054 } 138 1879.------------------------------------------------------------- 2 3 , 100 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 2 660 1,000 1874-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 3 774 2, 510 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 3 |---------- 2, 527 1876.------------------------------------------------------------- 3 5 197 4,000 1877-------------------------------------------------------------. 9 4 650 1, 200 GLOUCESTER, Oct. 17, 1877. JAMES G. T.A.R.R. & BRO. 33.72 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. U.—Statement of Clark & Somes. 5 || 3 | | 3 || : º ,23 *_ 15 - % . # 5 g *’s dº Years. § 3 | #5 ‘s & ‘5.3 rº P = © Q} $4– z; 24 ſº CO 1866-------------------------------------------------------------- 8 3 3, 456 811 1867-------------------------------------------------------------- 9 4 3,070 1, 942 1868-------------------------------------------------------------- 8 4 1,486 1,000 1869. ------------------------------------------------------------- 4 8 1, 0:8 3,036 1870-------------------------------------------------------------. 4 10 1,095 4,476 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 1. 12 143 \4,908 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- f 4 163 1, 540 1873 ------------------------------------------------------------. 1 5 145 1, 466 1874----------------------------------------------------------- tº m sº 1 8 201 6, 518 1873--------------------------------------------------------------|------- 9 |---------- 3,478 1876-----------------------. -------------------------------------|-------. 10 |---------. 8,561 1877-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 5 |---------- 1,944 39 82 11,047 39, 680 I certify that the above is a true statement from the books of Joseph Friend and testified by him. º - A. CARTER, Dep. Cqll. W.—Statement of George Norwood & Son. = : • &t; QL, º : rº . § . "…S "3 . º ºº:: # 8, # 9 + 5 § Years. § 3. SD c © 13 *-ſ ºld º P. 3 © o Tº &l-4 &= 0.2 cº cº • e g = ºf 5 C O º ..º 2. 24 ſº £º 1866--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------- ----------|---------- 1867--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------- |----------|---------- 1868. -------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------- ----------|---------- 1869.------------------------------------------------ is a we as m ms is s m = m me a | * * * * * * * * | *s as as e s is a * * * * * * * * * * | * * * * * * * * * * 1870--------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|----------|---------- 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 4. 9 800 2, 548 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 5 695 756 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- 5 2 1,866 682: 1874--------------------------------------------------------------|------- 4 |---------- 2, 138 1875--------------------------------------------------------------|-------- 3 ---------- 2,078 1876--------------------------------------------------------------|-------- 3 |---------- 2,981 1877------------------------------------------------------------- l--------|--------|----------|---------- GEO. NORWOOD & SON AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3373 X.—Statement of George Friend & Co. .5 #: § £ ,23 ad ~ . 3 - § % CD º *: 3 Bº U2 ºn ‘E 3 et- $2 Years. #3 g 3 º: a 3 tº- *H 92 º cº * | * º; H | g 5 C © rº rº I 2. 2. ſº £3 1866.------------------------------------------------------------- 0 0 0 0 1867 -------------------------------------------------------------- 0 () 0 0 1868-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 0 0 0 1869-------------------------------------------------------------. 0 0 0 0 1870.-------------------------------------------------------------|-------. 4 || --------- 1, 567 1871-------------------------------------------------------------. 3 5 622 2, 173 1872-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 3 506 97 1873.------------------------------------------------------------- ad 1874-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 3 1875-------------------------------------------------------------- ſ: E 1876-------------------------------------------------------------- 2, 3 1877-------------------------------------------------------------- J ' ', a Attest: GEORGE FRIEND & CO., - ... By JoHN J. SOMEs. Y.—Statement of Cunningham & Thompson. They fit 11 vessels. - .E. º º g 2 ra ~ . O Q) . Tº "3 #7; # 8, 3 g5 + š 5 Years. g & Q 5 ©, ºd *: º3 .r.o. P. 3 Q oº: S++ t{- dº CŞ cº e o º; 3 2: 3 O C rº rº A. 2. 2. º ſº 1876-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 1 ||No return 1, 100 1877-------------------------------------------------------------. 1. 2 |No return 500 ClONNINGEIAM & THOMIPSON. GLOUCESTER, Oct. 16, 1876. - Z.—Statement of George Dennis & Co. .E. º º g ,23 va tº . 9 . 3 #3 º #; Years. § 3 £5 ‘s; $3.3 E.; P. E. C o's &H SH Od Cö . c.3 • e º; 3 º; 3 © * 3 ~ 2. 2. à £3 #: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * s es as a sm as us - e = * l 807-------------------------------------------------------------. o, 1868,------------------------------------------------------------. lf 3 1869----------------------------------- tº s = s = s tº as ºn - - - - e º ºs º gº tº º ºs º - - - - sº ; :# 1870-------------------------------------------------------------- 2, # 1871----------------------------- tº º ºs s = * * *s ºs ºf s m tº s ºn a º e - º sº as an e º ºs ºs ºn tº º as as a rº 18°-------------------------------------------------------------- 1 1 93 203 1873 as tº gº ºr ºr - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * m as m me w w sm is as an as a sº se s m as tº me as a m = - 2 * * * g º ºr sº tº 368 tº sº ſº tº º tº e º ºs º £4--------------------------------------------- º º an º m is tº ºr ºn s º tº tº º ºs e a 1 3 270 1,712 1875-------------------- tº ºn tº tº tº sº tº sº º tº a ºn tº - tº tº gº is gº tº sº us - - tº * - nº m sº as tº s as as sº º 'º w nº º e 1 1 85 106 *---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 -, ------- 1, 959 1877----------- * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 3 536 3374. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. AA. .# ‘s 3 : 3: º ,23 & g Fº § É #g #3 #3 Years. § 3. § 3 * 3 tº dº. # gă så si d es så sš 2. 2. :* z; † 1866------------------------------------------------------------ 9 1 3, 711 462. 1867.----------------------------------------------------------- 8 2 2, 842 474 1868------------------------------------------------------------ 5 1 914 296 i869.----------------------------------------------------------. 4 2 805 381, 1870-----------------------------------------------------------. 5 1 1, 153 105. 1871.----------------------------------------------------------- 5 0 1,020 - - - - - - - - 1872------------------------------------------------------------ 4 1. 1,207 208. 1873------------------------------------------------------------ 3 1. 1, 643 720 1874------------------------------------------------------------ 4 5 1, 847 3,044 1875. ----------------------------------------------------------. 1 4 153 3, 784 1876.----------------------------------------------------------. O 5 0 5, 578. 5 early. 1877.----------------------------------------------------------. 4 } 3 since ! 5 1,021 Sept. 10th. The above does not include fresh mackerel sold, which would probably amount to at least 2500 bbls. taken on this shore, but includes salt sold out of pickle, which accounts for the difference between this FOWE & JORD.A.N. and our inspection returns. * ^ BB.-Statement of Leonard Walen. Fits 5 vessels. 3 . ‘sº p-4 gå g; 3,3 rº 'S Years. a 3 rº à *: E ‘5 g C CD pººl Ps $– cº sº 3.3 3. 2. z; † H 1866-------------------------------------------------------------- 215 1, 100 1867. ------------------------------------------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * 182 940 1868-------------------------------------------------------------- 210 1, 300 1869-------------------------------------------------------------. None----|---------- 1870-------------------------------------------------------------- None.----|---------. 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 480 880 1872.--------------------------- tº as ºn as nº º ºs ºn sº s = * * * * * * * is s as ºs º ºs ºn tº us as s nº me as as a None--- l---------- 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- None. -- . 1.---------- 1874.------------------------------------------------------------- 20 1,600 1875-------------------------------------------------------------- None----|---------- 1876-------------------------------------------------------------. 170 860 1877-------------------------------------------------------------- 159 900 9,296 Oct. 17, 1877. LEONARD WALEN. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3375 CC.—Statement of William S. Womson. F. º: º g Gº dº ~ . C "3 "3 g- * -: GD U2 dº # E | ## | + š - š Years. #3 : 3 °% 3-3 Sº- C#-4 CD cº cº C o 2: 3 º 3 º © º --> Z! 2. ſº ſº 1866-------------------------------------------------------------- 0 0 ----------|---------- 1867 -------------------------------------------------------------- 0 6 ---------- 767. 1868-------------------------------------------------------------. 2 4 972 490, 1869.------------------------------------------------------------- 2 |. 7 841 1,061 1870-------------------------------------------------------------. 1. 4 155 1, 132 1871-------------------------------------------------------------- 3 3 547 363 1879-------------------------------------------------------------. 0 1 |. 261 1873-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 7 923 927 1874-------------------------------------------------------------- 2 3 885 266 1873------------------------------------------------------------- 1 1 156 459 1876-------------------------------------------------------------. 0 7 --------- 2, 878 1877-------------------------------------------------------------. 1 6 9 1, 200 W.M. S. WONSON. W. Statement of Mackerel inspected at Portsmouth and Newcastle for the years 1869 to 1877, inclusive. W. MACKEREL INSPECTED AT PORTSMOUTH AND NEWCASTLE, N. H. Year ending May 1, 1869. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 Barrels. 6% 66 1870- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3,700 4% & 4 € $ 1871. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . 2, 071 46 46 6% 1872- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... 1, 878 44 66 £ 6 1873. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2, 398 46 & 4 & 6 1874. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * 5, 519 & 4 4% 46 1875. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3, 415 { % {{ 66 1876. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5,351 {{. 44 { % 1877. - - - - - - - - - - - tº sº as we º 'º we sº e º 'º - tº dº º tº 643 46. 9) 25,132 Average ... • . . . . . . • * * * * * *----. 2, 792 STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, - Secretary's Office, Concord, Sept. 4, 1877. I hereby certify that the above statement is taken from the Reports of Inspection made to His Excellency the Governor by the several In- Spectors for the years therein named. In testimony whereof, I have hereunto subscribed my official signa- ture and affixed the Seal of the State. A. B. TEIOMPSON, Secretary of State. 3376 AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. VI. STATE OF MAINE, } OFFICE OF SECRETARY OF STATE. ſ. I hereby certify, that the following is a correct summary of the Annual Returns of the Inspector General of Fish for the State of Maine, for the several years hereafter written, so far as relates to mackerel inspected by him, viz.: 1866-------------- 45, 407 barrels. 1870.------------- 51, 611 barrels. 1867 -------------- 33,676 do. 1871. --------- ---. 48, 603 do. 1868. ------------- 26,876 do. 1872.------------- 22,973 do. 1869-------------- 36,031 do. 1873.---------4--. 22, 193 do. No return was made for the year 1874. In testimony whereof, I have caused the seal of the State to be here- unto affixed. Given under my hand at Augusta, this ninth day of Oc- tober, in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and seventy- seven, and in the one-hundred and second year of the Independence of the United States of America. S. J. CEIADBOURNE, Secretary of State. VII. Summary of Returns of Mackerel inspected in the State of Massachu- setts for several years past. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3377 ĮįĶķ ļ ģ!!! || Jººººº | {{6}} [[| 18338 | 988$ | ſg6?! | gų ſg |j|::::::::| 886ſ9 |::::::::| 019 ſq | 186 g | Igº 'g6 | 788 ºg l········---·····---·····---· 9181 Ź90;081 | 8,6 g | ȘI39!!0! [| 99，3|| 308 || || 0%:ſſ | 939 || ||I||I||I|| 893 ſ | ::::: ~~| gſ. I | 308 g | 0，0 ſg | ſg ºgg |--~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ glºi 08$ $$$ | 1993 || !§§§§§ [III]|$$$$$ | Ķ ķ ļ ģ8||9||959） |II]] &&# 9 | ſgï || || 9ğį į | 890. g | £18 311||90998 |:::::::::::::::::::::::::::: #481 șğ}}}| | $$$ | \{\{... | 9ģĶķĻļ [III] !!$$$ | 9ğý $ | 19ļ ȘI | 181 ſgýſ ſ 1 00ğ} | #89 $ | 813? || 69$ $8 || IIý 93 |:::::::::::::::::::::III.， gļºſ 496||8||88}}& | 300 T | ĢĻļ ȘI0ț¢, $3 | £T£ 8 | 919'01 | 918 ºg [j]; j| 910 ſg | Iggſ | 6,9 g | 138 g | 968; 19 | ggy 'gg |----~--~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ 3181 !!!！!$$$ | {{!}} | {{!... | §§§§ [|]|$3$ | 8039 | 966 || I || 36 g |II]]| 819 g | 883$ | 1763 | 9ÞI? || 600%,0|| 910;&# |…--~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~）; ilsI $$$$$ | §:ſſ | {{!}} | ģ Ķ [III] &#ģ Ķ |$$$$ | ģ9;ſ | ¡ ¿ $ [[| 99ļ ȘI | 90%; || 908$ | 988 || |ggg gäı| 98). ſgï || … ::::::::::::::::::::::::: óſºſ I08 ºff83#ő 1880. 8. || 866.83.]]|g8? 3. || 399 8. || 898$.|{{!!!... [|]|$89'6 || 9&g '9） || 896 ºg || 6039 || 23186 || g9I% |····---···---· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 6981 {• • • • • • • • W • - - e ºs • • • ► • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • I • • • • ** = • • ! … • • • • • • • ºpºſſiis?!63 | 998 Q3 || IIIIII|| 998 II || 99，3 || 6ýI || || 613 g | II*****] I | 066$ | g16 g | 093 g | 961 g | Lig ſg). | 683'00}························-- gost ĢĻĢ Į Į3 | 90ğ'ſ...| 8038 | 368 || I |[[| 9țg $3 | Ķī£$ | Ogg $9 | 6Ğſ g | 33· · · · · * * * | sg). ‘6 | 161, ºg | OSŤ '9 | 69; ‘L | 8I6 ºgOI|I}}, ºg I | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 193I 9$2$3 [] ****| #90'3 | $$$ ſſ |]~~~~ | ¡ ¿ $¢ | 9į63 | 30).ſg | Igg ſg |II]]| ſºț ? || IIſ g | g9g%. | 697） | 988;&II| 881 și |--------------------------- öğšī #####§, |,888....| #9ğ}} | 9!.....| }} }} |}}}} | $$$ | {{!!}} |II]]| 830% || 19ļºg | 9ț¢ $ | gſg $ | 9 g ſığı] gº& |:::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ğģši ##### 8ļģȚ.|[[[[####• • • • • • • • •########{{}} |#}}, [[|]|$ $. | $3 | }}}} | 808 || || 886 ſºlſ| 99$ $3 [] #981 ######| ??（[-...-...|# #|…......|#|#|#|#| |#|#| |#}}} |（}"|]|$#|#|#| |#|#| |#|#|#| |#|#| |#|#|]|$）; 5• • • • • • • • ł •• • • •�ºce£{] ŽĢģ ĶĪ | 988 || I || QQ}} | 8|8}} | 88ğ:9ļī| №g '68398Ț $$$$$ | 308 || IIIIII || 9ģ:9Į | 033 | 8ĮŽĮ | 89$ $ | 116||01 || 909 || || 10#4:13:6 | ç&& ‘6 | 066 $ | 93T ‘L | 9Ig ‘06 || IL; ‘6I |· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · - - - - - - - - - - - Ig3I 90ļ Ș$3 | 898 [III] Q98:61 | 983,... | 098 || 3 | №ſgºw | 088:6 || #60% | 889 ſj| 086 11 | ſı, ‘II || 499 g | Ģ08 ºg | ž55%6 || $äi ſăg |---------------------------- öğši 9ț¢ $$. || 98.....[III]]| }}}} | }} | } | }} | 809. || 86|| ? || 8093 | 16ğ [] ##3$ | 06g38 | y008 | 338 % || 799 （5g | Šč6 ſă ||··---···---···---···---·····--- ğčší ;};}|:::::::|::::::::|$£§..|ſº.ſ..|..$$$$..|ſſſ!!!..|ſſſſ...|#||3.|$3....|… :::::|0ęſº...|400$.ļºſ...|ſsſſſ...|..$$$ | №gg||J.:::::::::::::::::::::::și -------. | …… … | …… .- | … …- | --- … | … … | … .- | … （↓ ↓ ↓- -> i - - - - - • → • ， • • • • • - --|---------------------------- №ggi 8I£ $18 | 69†* * * * * * | 8&g ‘6 | 698 % | g6g ‘03 || 8I£ ‘# | 030 ‘OI || 999 ‘8. | 669! Þý†g6 ‘L | ÞIO ‘6 | €Ig ‘9 | Ig I ºg I || #60 ‘39 || OFI ºſg |- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- $ſg3!} | {{!}} [| 99ğ} | ſg ºg | 88$ $3 | 9ģī£ | 9g. ſſ | ¡ ¿ $ | 301 ‘L | 0898L/, ‘8 | IgŤ ‘8 || 0ț¢, ºg | Oſſ ºg I | ĢĞI ‘gae | ±85%;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::# #####$;, [] ;$$$ | Ģģ |}}}| | $$$$ | {{!}} | }} |}}}|, | Ģģ, | }}} | {{{|} | &#$ | ¡ ¿ $ | 388 ſº | §§§§ 1:::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Égšī ŽĘ;$$$ | Ģģ Į [| 9833. || $ğ,... | §§ 8. || 680 $ | 89ť || || 1932 | 090 || || #8ż3 || 809 || || $18,9 || gſg ff | 868 #0.1 | 168 18 | 838 '88 |-------- ------------------- çēší $$$$$$ | ſºț] [] #9$$] | ĢģĶķ. | 498 || || $9, ºg | Ilſ 31 | 083!!0! | Ǻğ8 || 0038 | p19II || #81 ºg I || gſg ſg | 508 fil | gió;&# | ſāšſēě|----------------------------žģği §§§§3 | $#@!） [| $$$ $3 | $$$$I | !!！!$$ | $$$ | 938$1$ | ĢģĶgſ | №ggſ | $9，9 || $1, $3 | 898$3 | 0ț¢ $ | 80% ſº | ſºſiº | §§ ſõă ||··---···---···---···---··---· řeši &Ļ9 '&ý& | &90 ºg998'ſ & | 019'8 | g19 'ſ. I || #9), ºg | 688 'ſ I || 968 '03 | 138 ºg | g90'9 | 9ý8 ºg I || 9gg $1 | 916 ºg | 636 ºgg || 866 ‘6# | 993 ºgg |---------------------------- Oggi H3C)Hg©- § | Ș | -3 | 3 || ? | ? | ? || 5 || 5 || 5 || ă | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? È,GЧ2 ºff-<ſ}=3} !€+}=3B}=3±3șȧ.<%£34. →F;į. №Ē“Ş>Ētrº{3.# * •Ë3.0：2±*aecºo© 'S,È §.©$Ë©ſo±3£Y)3§©C)Ē%Þ ©© ©&.ș+�Þºe+5.ș+E5.< Mr. DOUTRE. It was for our own use in examining the witness. EIon. Mr. KELLOGG. I only want to know whether it is to be used by the board or not. Mr. DouTRE. No, not as part of the evidence. Mr. DANA. I hope we have not been guilty of any mistake. The first part came here only yesterday, and Mr. Foster got it from the British Agent. Mr. DOUTRE. Several copies were given to Professor Baird. Mr. DANA. Not until after he had given his evidence. |By Mr. Trescot: Q. With regard to the theory of this report, a great portion of which We Have read with a great deal of interest, as I understand, the purport is that the advance in the study of ocean physics has been such that cetrain laws have been discovered, the application of which, like other scientific laws, will develop a large fishing industry if properly applied ?–A. Certainly. Q. You think that promise of increase in the extension of the fisheries ought to be taken into account in estimating their value 3—A. Yes. Q. Has the discovery of these laws advanced far enough to be prac- tically applied within the next two or three years?—A. Certainly. They are already practically applied in Norway and by Q. Taking the habits of the fish into consideration, the orographic out- line of the coast, the operation of the Arctic current and the Gulf Stream, the variation of the zone temperature, together with one or two other things, the winds and tides; all those considerations govern the question Where the mackerel will be found. Now, is your knowledge of that habit sufficiently certain to enable you to say, at any given moment, that the mackerel will be there at such and such a time, on such and such a line of coast 2—A. Certainly not. But there is now being instituted, under the auspices of the United States Government, a series of marine obser- Vations, especially under the direction of the Coast Survey, and all of those will pass through the hands of Professor Baird. Those are for the purpose of taking the temperature, not only at the surface but at certain depths below. But nothing has been done yet. i Q. That being the case, and you having admitted the American fisher- men under the treaty of 1871, so as to make this practically one continu- Ous line of fisheries dependent on each other, don’t you think a system that would end by putting the whole thing under one joint commission Would be a great deal better than any award of any kind 3–A.. I am not capable of answering the question so far as the award is concerned, but so far as the development of the fisheries is concerned it would be an immense advantage, there is no doubt. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3441 By Mr. Doutre: Q. I simply wish to ask you a question to bring out a full explanation in regard of this book.-A. I have given every explanation. Q. The government wanted to use your practical knowledge for its own guidance and requested you to prepare this information ?—A. I presume so, but this manuscript book which I have prepared was pre- pared especially for my own evidence. - Q. When were you requested by the government to devote yourself to this business %–A. Well, I was requested in the first week in May. I received a telegram at St. John's, Newfoundland. Q. You were requested by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to go to Ottawa 3—A. Yes, and provided that the Newfoundland Government would agree that I should put off the expedition to the Labrador until next year I consented to go. I submitted the request to the Govern- ment of Newfoundland, made through the Minister of Marine and Fish- eries, and they agreed in the most cordial manner, and I at once went to Ottawa. - Q. You were put in communication with Mr. Whitcher ?—A. Yes. Q. You were to devote all your time and give the result to the gov- ernment 3–A. Since that I have devoted the whole of my time to the preparation of this report on the subject generally; since that time to the present moment. - By Hon. Mr. Kellogg : Q. There is one point in your evidence with regard to layers of waters and the temperature of the water, and I understand you to say that the colder layer would come to the surface. Why would the colder layer come to the top, although it is of greater density 2–A. In rushing over the Banks the cold water, which is at the bottom, forces the warm water up and it flows out on either side. Q. You don’t approve very much of the theory of the mackerel mi- grating. Probably you don’t believe in it? You think they go into the mud and hibernate %–A. In the mud and sand. Q. Well, to what extent do you believe they do so 2 Is that the way the great part of the mackerel dispose of themselves in the winter 3– A. I think that is so, not only with the mackerel but with a number of Other fish. Q. Well, does that account for the disappearance of the mackerel dur- ing the Winter to any considerable extent 7–A. Yes. Q. They go to the bottom or into the sand”—A. Yes. Q. Well, to what extent do you think they do it?–A. I think they all hibernate just the same as the sturgeon in fresh water; and on the United States coast, the tautog, the scup, and other fish hibernate. Q. How far do you think they go out? What number of fathoms to get into the mud º–A. It depends entirely on the ice. They always appear to select those spots where the salt-water ice shall not be drifted in, so that they will not be exposed to the cold current dropping down from the Salt ice as it melts in the spring. .* Q. Where does the American coast mackerel go 2 They don’t have the Arctic waters there very much 3–A. O, yes; the Arctic current is felt in Winter nearly as far as Cape Hatteras. Q. You spoke of the cod schooling. I had not understood that the cod schooled in the way that the mackerel schooled. How does the Schooling show itself, in the same way as the mackerel ?—A, Cod school like mackerel before spawning; they also appear to school at the begin- ning of each bait season. It is the schooling habit which enables them to be Seined. 216 F. 3442 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. The following tables are the tables referred to in the evidence of Pro- fessor Hind : No. 1. Statistics of the French fishery on the Grand Banks, and the northeast coast of Newfound- land during successive periods from 1826 to 1856. From 1826 to 1841.------------------------------- 374 ships, 10,445 fishermen sailors. From 1842 to 1847. ----...----- tº sº tº sº ºn tº tº sº as ºn * * * * * * * * * * 389 ships, 11,378 fishermen sailors. From 1848 to 1850. ------------------------------- 346 ships, 11,011 fishermen sailors. From 1851 to 1856. - - - - - • * ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * e - - - - e s s .383 ships, 11,348 fishermen sailors. “Le Pilot de Terre Neuve,” Vol. I, p. 26. - - NO. II. Statistics of the French fishery on the Great Banks of Newfoundland and on the Northeast - Coast. Years. Nº|Nºor *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - 256 11, 134 1861--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 255 10, 999 186?--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 238 10, 465 1863--------------------------------------------------------------------------. 239 9,448 1864--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 180 7, 175 1865--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 185 7,041 1866--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 197 7,071 1867--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 192 6, 501 (“Le Pilote de Terre Newve,” Vol. 1, page 26.) NO. III. Statistics of the French fisheries on the northeast coast of Newfoundland, from Cape Norman to Cape St. John. i * d rºd c + #. a 5 # 8 º' g spºt q) g: ".. bſ) CO Q 3 || 5 | ####| || 5. tº- C .F.3 × 5- 4– Years. : $– Eº.5 & : QC) q2 2 ~5 P . Q rº rº S. Ha ; ; ; E F. 3, #3: GO CŞ £ p E :F 3 || 3: 2 || 2 | # Z! 1860 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 105 || 6, 180 4 122 1861 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 105 6,058 3 93 186°------------------------------------------------------------------ 112 || 9,593 3 , 93 1863------------------------------------------------------------------ 116 5,493 3 93 1864------------------------------------------------------------------ 58 3, 264 7 274 1865 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 55 3, 118 6 151 1866 -----------------------------------------------*------------------ 57 2, 758 17 369 1867 -----------------------------------------------------------------. 5 2,068 17 384 (“Le Pilote de Terre Newve,” Vol. II, page 399.) NO. IV. Statistics of the French bank-fishery on the Great Banks of Newfoundland. from 1860 to 1867. Bank fishery, - with drying Bank fishery, Bank fishery, with drying at * ~ *. on northeast without dry- Total. e # ; *| coast of New ing. Years. QI tº foundland. Ships. Men. Ships. Men. Ships. Men. Ships. Men. 1860-------------------------------. 68 2,735 4 122 51 1,016 123 3,873 1861-------------------------------- 61 2, 558 3 93 58 1, 172 122 3,853 1862.------------------------------- 48 1, 591 3 93 41 834 92 || 2,518 1863-------------------------------- 40 1,480 3 90 44 866 87 2, 436 1864-------------------------------- 38 1, 252 7 274 46 986 91 2, 512 1865------------------------------- 42 1, 515 6 151 55 1,048 103 2, 714 1866-------------------------------. 47 1,640 17 369 64 1,260 128 3, 269 1867-------------------------------. 51 1, 761 17 384 69 1, 466 137 3, 611 (“Le Pilote de Terre Newve,” Vol. 1, page 25.) AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3443 NO. V. Statistics of the French fisheries in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. ‘5 5 5 ºf s 8- a gº # 3 is Years. ‘5.3, o ; 5 : £ a ~ rº 92 F. E 8 E p 2. 2. ; * * * * * * * * * * * * s = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *s sº as ºn sº tº º ºs ºs = sº dº sº, sº º ºs as s ; # ; The Islands of St. Pierre and 1862 ............................I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I. 34 | 1.354 Miquelon send to the West Coast 1šč3 II.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I. 36 | 1.519 about 15 schooners manned by 1864 .........I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I. 3i i.399 12 men. They dispatch also into 1865 ........ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - § i.; the gulf about 120 to 160 men to 1366 ...I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I. 33 | 1.043 mºn from 60 to 80 dorys to fish iš67 III.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.III. 20 'g. about Cod Roy and Red Island. (“Le Pilote de Terre Newve,” Vol. 1, page 246.) Affidavits read in rebuttal by Mr. Whiteway. No. 1. NEW FOUNDLAND. Saint John's, to wit: Thomas Rumsey, aged thirty years, fisherman, residing at Saint John's, aforesaid, maketh oath and saith : Deponent is well acquainted with the fisheries of Newfoundland, and is intimately acquainted with the herring fishery. Deponent, last spring, saw three United States herring seines used by American fishermen in “barring herrings” at Long Harbor in Fortune Bay, and knows that large quantities of her- rings were “barred ” by these seines and taken out afterwards by using their small seines, which these United States fishermen came down pre- pared with. Deponent knows that United States fishermen are in the habit of using their own Seines to inclose herrings on our coasts, and of employ- ing British fishermen to assist in hauling these Seines. Deponent knows of one instance in which United States fishermen brought down a large herring seine completely fitted out with Seine boat and all necessary gear, which they sold to a person named Fiander, at English Harbor, in Fortune Bay. Deponent further has heard and believes that another such seine was sold by United States fishermen to one Burke, at St. Jacques, in Fortune Bay, and in both cases the value of such seines was to be paid for by supplying these United States fishermen with herrings at nominal prices, hauled by these seines, the crews working the same being composed almost wholly of American fishermen. Deponent fur- ther says that be knows of one instance that happened last spring, in Which a cargo of fresh herrings was hauled by a United States crew and vessel in Fortune Bay, aforesaid, and sold at St. Pierre as bait for French fishermen ; and that it has been stated—and as deponent believes truly stated—other United States fishermen did the same thing. De- ponent has been informed that United States fishermen intend provid- ing themselves with larger seines than those now used by them, (which are much larger than those by Newfoundland fishermen) and with these seines to engage largely in catching bait on Newfoundland shores to supply French fishermen at St. Pierre. THOMAS RUMSEY. 3444 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. Sworn before me at St. John's, aforesaid, this 9th day of October, A. D. 1877. - D. W. PROWSE, Stipendiary Magistrate, St. John's, Newfoundland. NEW FOUNDLAND, Central District, St. John's, to wit . - John Rumsey, of Fortune Harbour, in Fortune Bay, Newfoundland, maketh Oath and saith : I have heard the foregoing deposition of my brother, Thomas Rumsey, read over. It is correct and true in every particular. The name of one of the American captains is Jacobs. He formerly lived in Green Bay, Newfoundland. I cannot remember the name of the United States Schooner that he commanded. I have been engaged fourteen years in the herring fishery in Fortune Bay. I have been fishing for thirty years in Newfoundland. his JOHN + RUMSEY. mark. Sworn before me at St. John's, Newfoundland, this 9th day of Octo- ber, A. D. 1877. - D. W. PROWSE, Stipendiary Magistrate, St. John's, Newfoundland. No. 2. Bobert Inkpen, aged 33 years, of Burin, Newfoundland, fisherman, maketh oath and saith : Deponent has been connected with the fish- eries of Newfoundland since he was fourteen years of age, and has pros- ecuted the same almost continuously since that time. Deponent is ac- Quainted with the bait-fishery in Newfoundland, and with the operations of United States vessels in British waters on our coasts. Deponent is well aware that no advantages result to British fishermen from these operations compared to the injuries to British interests, and is also well informed that the localities chiefly frequented by United States vessels are marked peculiarly as localities where the inhabitants are found in the most straitened circumstances. Deponent knows that United States fishermen did use their own seines in Fortune Bay last spring in hauling bait, and that they did so in the early part of the spring in contraven- tion of a local law that prevented local fishermen hauling herrings before the 25th day of April, and loaded their vessels with about eight hundred barrels herrings, which they carried to St. Pierre, and there sold to French bankers. Captain Kirby was in charge of one of these United States vessels. Deponent says, further, that no money paid by Ameri- cans for bait is adequate to the injury they do to local fisheries and fish- ermen, and that all classes in this country agree in pronouncing their operations a great evil. - ROBERT INKE2EN. Sworn before me at St. John's, Newfoundland, this 26th day of Octo- ber, A. D. 1877. D. W. PROWSE, Stipendiary Magistrate, St. John's, Newfoundland. John Mitchell, aged 52 years, residing at Burin, . Newfoundland, . maketh Oath and Saith : I was present when Robert Inkpen made the above statement, which I know to be true in all particulars. JOHN MITCHELL. AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3445 Sworn before me, at St. John's, Newfoundland, this 26th day of Octo- ber, A. D. 1877. D. W. PROWSE, Stipendiary Magistrate, St. John's, Newfoundland. I, Frederic B. T. Carter, a notary public, duly admitted and sworn, practicing at St. John's, Newfoundland, do hereby testify that D. W. IProwse, who has subscribed his name to the jurat of the affidavit of Robert Inkpen and of John Mitchell, on the third page of this sheet of paper, is one of Her Majesty's justices of the peace for the island of New- foundland; that the signature “D. W. Prowse, stipendiary magistrate, St. John's, Newfoundland,” is the true handwriting of the said justice, and that full faith and credit ought to be given thereto in court and thereout. * In testimony whereof I have affixed my notarial seal and subscribed my name this 24th day of October, A. D. 1877. (L. S.) FREDERIC B. T. CARTER, Notary Public. No. 3. Stephen Power, aged 38 years, trader and fisherman, residing at Placentia, Newfoundland, maketh oath and saith : I am practically acquainted with the fisheries of this country, having followed the same since I was 14 years of age. I have been engaged by American fishermen in procuring bait in Placentia Bay. I found the Seine and the Americans supplied the crew, and for my services as pilot, hire of seine, and my own aid in working the seine with the American crew I was paid twenty-seven dollars in May last by Captain Hickman, of the American schooner I. S. Glover. I am well aware that American fishermen do haul bait for themselves, and I am well informed that they brought down four large seines this year to Fortune Bay, which were worked exclusively for their purposes and advantages. Such Seines were very much larger than those used by our own people, and are destructive to the herring fishery. These seines succeded in pro- curing large quantities of herrings earlier than the local Seines, owing to their great length and depth ; one of them I heard barreled upwards of (4,000) four thousand barrels of herring at one time. The operations of such large seines are highly injurious to the fisheries. STEPEIEN POWER. Sworn before me, at St. John’s, Newfoundland, the 12th day of Octo- ber, A. D. 1877. W. J. S. DONNELLY, Justice of the Peace for the Island of Newfoundland. I, Frederic B. T. Carter, a notary public, duly admitted and sworn, practicing at John's, Newfoundland, do hereby certify that W. J. S. Donnelly, who has subscribed his name to the jurat of the affidavit of Stephen Power, on the second page of this sheet of paper, is one of Her Majesty's justices of the peace for the island of Newfoundland; that the signature, “W. J. S. Donnelly, justice of the peace for the island of New- foundland,” is the true handwriting of the said justice, and that full faith and credit ought to be given thereto in court and thereout. In testimony whereof I have affixed my notarial seal and subscribed my name, this 24th day of October, A. D. 1877. (L. S.) F. B. T. CARTER, Notary Public. 3446 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. \ No. 4. By Stephen Fiander, of Coombs Cove. I reside at Coombs Cove, Fortune Bay. I was engaged catching or trying to catch herring for United States vessels at Long Harbor last winter. I was concerned in the seine brought by Captain Deagle, of Edwin or Eben Parsons, in De- cember last. I was one of the crew who hauled herring with it. None of the crews of United States vessels were concerned or employed in the use of said Seine; we had it from Captain Deagle on condition of our selling to him all the herring which should be hauled with it. We hauled about 800 barrels, which we sold to him. We hauled them at Table Beach. Samuel Fiander bought it from him afterwards. I saw the crew of United States vessel Wildfire engaged hauling herring at Table Beach about first of January last. The captain of said vessel was with them ; the seine and skiff they used belonged to the vessel, and was managed entirely by crews of United States vessels with the excep- tion of one man, Bond, whom I saw with them. He, Bond, was to re- ceive one share only (i. e., one man’s share). They inclosed that day about 300 barrels herring; they were not, however, all saved, as a gale of wind came on and the seine burst; I believe over half of the herring were thus lost. Captain Cunningham, master of said vessel, brought the purse-lines of the Seine with him. The crews of United States vessels use those purse-lines when they haul herring; we British fishermen never use them. I heard Captain Deagle, of United States schooner Ldwin or Eben Parsons; Captain Charles Lee, of United States schooner , of Gloucester; and Captain Cunningham, of United States schooner Wildfire, say, that they would have whatever herrings they wanted with their own crews and seines if their crews were quite willing to do So. his - STEPHEN + FIANDER. mark. Taken and sworn before me at Coombs Cove, the 16th day of October, 1877. PEIILIP HOBERT, J. P. No. 5. Dy Philip Thornhill, of Anderson Cove. I reside at Anderson Cove, Long Harbor. I was at Anderson Cove when Captain Allen, of the Bonanza, United States vessel, arrived from head of Fortune Bay, in June, 1876, where, I understood from crew of said vessel and others, she had hauled a large quantity of herring. I believe the hauling of the herring was done entirely by the crew of said vessel; there was one or two British fishermen on board, but I understood they had no share in the Seine. The Seine and skiff they used belonged to the vessel. I saw the crew of said vessel engaged hauling or trying to haul herring at Anderson Cove in June, 1876. The men employed at it were those of the vessel. I think they hauled some at Anderson Cove and salted them on board. I believe the Seine and skiff was taken back by said Vessel. his PHILIP -- THORNEIILL. mark. Taken and sworn before me at Harbor Breton the 16th October, 1877. PHILIP BOBERT, J. P. Award OF THE FISHERY CoMMISSION. 344 No. 6. By George Rose, of Jersey Harbor. I now reside at Jersey Harbor, Fortune Bay. In June, 1876, Captain Allen, of United States schooner Bonanza, arrived at Little Bay (Bay de Lean), where I then resided, and told me he wanted to haul about 1,400 barrels herring in Fortune Bay; that he had a herring seine and skiff on board of his vessel, and everything else necessary for hauling, and asked me to go with him as master of his seine, and that he would give me twenty cents per barrel for every barrel of herring that was hauled. I agreed, and my son John and I went on board at once. We left and sailed for Long Harbor, but did not haul any herring there; from thence we sailed for head of For. tune Bay, where we hauled about 400 barrels, which were salted on board the vessel. The seine, skiff, and crew belonged to the vessel, and, as I have said, I was simply engaged as master of the seine. The men employed hauling the herring all belonged to the said vessel. After the 400 barrels herring were salted on board we returned to Long Harbor in her. We (i. e., the crew of vessel and myself helping them) tried to haul herring there, but did not succeed. I left the vessel there and returned home. Captain Allen, the master of said vessel, paid me for my services the sum of eighty dollars; my son received nothing. I heard afterwards that he got at Long Harbor after I left about 1,000 barrels, but cannot tell if he hauled them all or if he hauled any. He told me he intended putting up the herring at Gloucester and reship- ping them for Sweden. his .* GEORGE + ROSE. mark. Taken and sworn before me at Jersey Harbor the 17th Octobér, 1877. PHILIP HOBERT, J. P. No. 7. NEW FOUNDLAND, Saint John's, to wit: Maurice Bonia, of Placentia, aged 58 years, fisherman, maketh oath and saith : I have been connected with the fisheries of Newfoundland for forty years. I know that United States vessels are accustomed to be baited at Fortune Bay with seines they bring themselves, and which they work with the aid of local fishermen. Last June I went pilot with Capt. Lauchlin McLeod, of the schooner P. L. Whitman, hailing from Gloucester, United States of America, from Placentia to Piper's Hole, in Placentia Bay, to haul herrings for bait, for which purpose I used my own Seine, and, with the aid of his crew and myself and my seine, he procured his bait. For my services as pilot and for hire of seine and assistance in working it, Captain McLeod paid me twelve dollars. I am fully sensible that the American fishermen in our waters, using the privileges conferred by the Washington Treaty, are greatly injur- ing Our people by their operations, and that absolutely no benefits re- Sult from their visits. his MAURICE + BONIA. mark. Sworn before me, at St. John's aforesaid, this 19th day of October, A. D. 1877. H. RENOUF, J. P. for Newfoundland. 3448 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. I, Frederic B. T. Carter, a notary public duly admitted and sworn, practising at St. John’s, Newfoundland, do hereby certify that “Henry Renouf,” who has subscribed his name “H. Renouf, J. P., for Newfound- land,” to the jurat of the affidavit of Maurice Bonia, written on the first page of this sheet of paper, is the proper handwriting of said Henry Re- nouf, one of Her Majesty's justices of the peace for Newfoundland, afore- Said, and that full faith and credit should be given to his acts in said capacity as well in court as thereon. In testimony whereof I have affixed my hand and seal of office and Subscribed my name, this 20th day of October, A. D. 1877. |L. S.] FRED. B. T. CARTER, Notary Public. No. 8. SouTHERN DISTRICT, NEWFOUNDLAND, Placentia, to wit . Humphry Sullivan, of Placentia aforesaid, fisherman, personally ap- peared before me, Thomas O'Reilly, esq., one of Her Majesty's justices of the peace for the southern district of the island of Newfoundland, and maketh oath and saith that during the last half of the month of May last, deponent piloted from Placentia to Piper's Hole the American schooners Webster Lauburn, Hodgson, master ; the Governor Good- win, McGrath, master; and the Laura Nelson, Prout, master; that de- ponent hauled a sufficiency of herring for bait for the Webster Lauburn and Governor Goodwin, and that the master of the Laura Nelson, with deponent's Seine, hauled bait enough for himself on the Sunday. his HUMPHRY + SULLIVAN. mark. Sworn to before me at Great Placentia, this 11th day of October, A. D., 1877. T. O’REILLY, Commissioner of Affidavits at G. P. I, Frederic B. T. Carter, a notary public duly admitted and sworn, practising at St. John's, Newfoundland, do hereby certify that Thomas O'Reilly, who has subscribed his name “T. O'Reilly, commissioner of affidavits,” to the jurat of the affidavit of Humphrey Sullivan, written On the first page of this sheet of paper, is the proper handwriting of said Thomas O'Reilly, one of Her Majesty’s justices of the peace, and a commissioner of affidavits in Newfoundland aforesaid, and that full faith and credit should be given to his acts in said capacity as well in COUlrt as thereout. In testimony whereof I have affixed my seal of office and subscribed my name, this 23d day of October, A. D., 1877. - |L. S. F. B. T. CARTER, Notary Public. A PP E N ID IDX R. No. 1. Gloucester Mutual Fishing Insurance Company. This Policy of Insurance Witnesseth, That the Gloucester Mutual Fishing Insurance Company, in Gloucester, do by these Presents, cause for whom it may concern, To be Insured, lost or not lost, — Hundred Dollars, on seven- eighths of the Schooner — and — — — Hundred T}ollars on the Outfits or Catch, — Commencing this day and terminating the thirtieth day of November next, at 12 o'clock, noon ; And to be insured in the manner prescribed by the By-Laws, and to be subject to all the restraints and liabilities therein No. $.................... Vessel valued at set forth. $ And especially does this Company agree to insure only " " Seven-eighths of any one vessel, nor over eight, thousand dol- lars on any one risk. The owner or owners, in all cases who are insured by this Company, shall always have one-eighth of said vessel, as valued by the Directors, on his or their own risk, and shall not be allowed to insure said one-eighth, or any portion thereof elsewhere. - This Company does not insure against Barratry of the Mas- ter. Or marinerS. No claim for loss on, or damage to, Fresh or Frozen Fish, Salt Her- ring in bulk, Dories, Trawl Gear, Nets, Seine, or Seine Boat, shall be allowed by this Company, unless in case of total loss of vessel. The insurers shall not be liable for any partial loss on Salt, Coal, Grain, Cured Fish, or Fruit, either preserved or otherwise, Or other goods that are esteemed perishable in their own nature, when carried on freight, or on the freight thereon, unless it amounts ” to 10 per cent. on the whole aggregate value of such articles, and happen by stranding. No claims shall be had for Outfits or Catch, insured, unless the loss amounts to or exceeds 10 per cent. on the value of Outfits or catch on board at the time of loss, and that loss shall be caused by fire or the dangers of the Sea. * It is also agreed that this Company shall not be liable in any case for loss on or damage to Outfits or Cargo carried on deck, nor for loss or damage to the cargo of any vessel employed in freighting, unless the loss amounts to 20 per cent. of the value of said cargo, and then for the excess above 15 per cent. only. amount of pe. No vessel shall be insured by this Company except those mium Note. hailing from Gloucester. No vessel shall be insured by the Company while engaged in the business of carrying Sand or Stone. If there be any Lime on board, one hundred per cent. to be added to the premium for the passage. Policy, $1.00. No claim for loss on the hull of a vessel shall be allowed by T this Company, unless said loss or damage shall amount to the following percentage on the whole value of said vessel as valued in the Wessel Insured, *… Cargo Insured, & Outfits Insured, $............ ......... $....................... 3450 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. § Policy, after deducting one-third for new, viz.:- A vessel val- *T* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ued at $7,500 and upwards, 54 per cent. ; $7,000 to $7,500, 6 per cent. ; $6,500 to $7,000, 6% per cent. ; $6,000 to $6,500, 7 per cent. ; $5,500 to $6,-000, 74 per cent. ; $5,000 to $5,500, 8 per cent.; $4,500 to $5,000, 9 per cent. ; $4,000 to $4,500, 94 per cent. ; $3,500 to $4,000, 104 per cent. ; $3,000 to $3,500, 11 per cent. ; $2,500 to $3,000, 12 per cent.; $2,500 to $2,500, 14 per cent.; $1,500 to $2,000, 18 per cent, ; $1,000 to $1,500, 25 per cent. ; all under $1,000, 30 per cent. Cables, Anchors, and Boats to be at the risk of the owners in all cases, except a total loss of vessel. Sails, Rigging, Masts, and all other appur- tenances belonging to the vessel, to be at the risk of the owners, in all cases, except the loss on them at one time amounts to the following per- centage on the whole value of the vessel as valued in the Policy, viz.:- A vessel valued at $8,000 and upwards, 10 per cent.; $7,000 to $8,000, 12 per cent. ; $6,000 to 7,000, 14 per cent. ; $5,000 to $6,000, 16 per cent. ; $4,000 to $5,000, 18 per cent. ; $3,000 to $4,000, 20 per cent. ; $2,000 to $3,000, 24 per cent.; $1,500 to $2,000, 30 per cent.; all under $1,500, 35 per cent. ; and under such adjustment one-third shall be de- ducted for new. Notice of any claim on the Company for damages shall be given to the Company within ten days of the arrival of the vessel, or no loss will be allowed. No vessel receiving damage, whereby the Company becomes liable, shall in any event be sold until directions to that effect shall have been communicated to the Master or Agent from the Company. Cables and Anchors lost or sacrificed on the fishing grounds shall not be paid for by the Company, in any case, except total loss of vessel. Gilt work or carving shall not, when lost or damaged, be paid for ex- cept in cases of total loss of vessel. In adjusting partial losses the bowsprit of a vessel shall be considered a Spar. - In cases of disaster to any Vessel insured, it shall be lawful for the insurers to take possession of and repair the damage, and to demand of the owners their proportion of the expense thereof, and the acts of the insured or insurers in taking possession thereof to save, preserve or repair the same, shall not be deemed to be a waiver or acceptance or admission of an abandonment, provided such Vessel shall be repaired and returned to the owners within four months from the date of the disaster. No claim for Total Loss shall be allowed by this Company, unless the cost of repairs (according to the Laws of the Company), at one time, after deducting one-third for new, amounts to fifty per cent. of the value of the Wessel as in the Policy. And the insurers are not in any case to be held to pay for any loss or damage by restraint, seizure or detention, by any legal or illegal power whatsoever, or for any dam- age, accident or loss, which may happen or occur to any Vessel while she may be under such restraint, detention or seizure. Nor will this Company, under any circumstances, pay for copper, or any other metal- lic material, used as a covering for the bottom of vessels except in cases of total loss, in which case the copper shall belong to the insurers; and copper or other metallic material used as aforesaid, shall not be consid- ered at all in the adjustment of a partial loss. Vessels and Owners liable for deposit and premium notes. The rates of premium for the current year, to commence on the date of application shall be as follows: From November 16th to November 30th of next year, 9 per cent.; from December 10th to November 30th of next year, 8 per cent.; from January 1st to November 30th of the same year, 7 per cent.; from January 15th to November 30th of the AWARD OF THE FISHE RY COMMISSION, 3451 same year, 6% per cent.; from February 1st to November 30th of the same year, 6 per cent.; from March 1st to November 30th of the same year, 5% per cent.; from April 1st to November 30th of the same year, 5 per cent.; from May 15th to November 30th of the same year, 4% per cent.; from July 1st to November 30th of the same year, 4 per cent. Two and one-half per cent. extra on the amount insured to be added to the premium of any vessel employed in the Greenland fisheries, or any business east of Flemish Cap or the forty-fifth degree of longitude; one per cent. for any vessel sailing on a voyage to Newfoundland, between the 16th of November, 1876, and the 1st of March, 1877; one-half of one per cent. to be added if employed in the Bay of Island fisheries on or after October 1st next, at 12 o'clock, noon; one-half of one per cent. to be added for any vessel engaged in the Georges fishery or any fisheries north and east of Georges which has not arrived in Gloucester harbor on or before October 15th, at 12 o'clock, noon; or for any vessel sailing on a voyage to Georges or any fishing grounds north or east of Georges, between October 15th and November 15th; and one-half of one per cent. extra premitim on any vessel sailing on a voyage or employed in any business easterly from Cape Sable, between October 31st and November 15th, at 12 o'clock, noon. And upon all risks not above provided for, the Directors shall have power to fix equitable rates for extra premiums to be charged and paid by the insured. .No vessel shall sail from the harbor of Gloucester on or after the fif- teenth day of November next, at noon, at the risk of this Company. A vessel so sailing is not insured under this Policy. The Policy of any vessel not having arrived from the voyage she then is on, November 30th, at 12 o'clock, noon, shall be continued until her arrival, a premium at the rate of one and one-half per cent per month, to be paid by the insured for such extension. Whenever the Directors shall require it, a survey shall be called upon any vessel receiving damages supposed sufficient to entitle them to re- pairs by the Company, and such repairs, when ordered by said survey, shall be made as such survey shall direct, and be done in a faithful and workman-like manner, one-third to be deducted for new in the adjust- ment of the loss. And so the President and Directors aforesaid are contented, and do hereby bind the property of the said Insurance Company, to be insured, executors, administrators, and assigns, for the true per- formance of the premises, confessing themselves paid the consideration due unto them for this insurance by the insured, at and after the rate Of per cent. for the term, with any extra premium above provided for, and in case a further amount shall be required to pay losses, in excess of said premium and extras, all such sums as may be levied on the premiums earned to pay such excess of losses. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the President hath signed, and the Secretary hath countersigned, at Gloucester, this day of one thou- Sand eight hundred and seventy- GEORGE STEELE, President. Secretary. 34.52 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. No. 2. BY.L.A WS of the Gloucester Mutual Fishing Insurance Company for the years 1876–77.—Adopted November, 1876.-George Steele, President ; N. D. Cunningham, Vice-President ; Cyrus Story, Secretary and Treas- Q0%"6)”. Article 1. This Company shall be governed by a board of ten Direct- ors, who shall be chosen from the Stockholders at the annual meeting of the Company by a stock vote ; one of whom shall be chosen by the Directors to act as President, and another to act as Vice-President. The duties of the President (and in his absence the Vice-President,) shall be to preside at all meetings of the Board, or of the Stockholders, and to perform such other duties as may be required of them. The Directors shall have power in case there is a vacancy on the Board caused either by non-acceptance, resignation or death, to choose from among the Stockholders some person or persons to fill the vacancy; they shall also have the power to appoint a Secretary and Treasurer, and to fix upon salaries to be paid to the officers of the Company. Article 2. The President and Directors shall superintend the concerns of the Company, and have the management and direction of all things not otherwise herein provided for. They shall provide a suitable Office for the transaction of business, and furnish it in such a manner as they shall think proper; they shall cause to be kept by the Secretary a fair record of all their transactions, and shall report at the annual meeting in each year, a detailed account of the concerns of the Company, which report, when accepted, shall be entered upon the records of the Com- pany. Article 3. The Secretary shall keep the books and accounts, shall col- lect and receive all monies, and pay the same over to the Treasurer as soon as received ; shall fill up and record all policies and orders, notify meetings, and perform such other duties of the office as the President and Directors may require. - Article 4. The Treasurer shall take charge of all the funds of the Company, and deposit the same in some Bank in Gloucester, in the name of the company. He shall pay out money by order of the Direct- ors, and all checks must be countersigned by the President. He shall give such bonds for the performance of his duties as the Directors may require. - Article 5. The President, in addition to his duties of presiding at meet- ings, shall sign all policies, and shall order the payment of all monies by the Treasurer, with the consent and approval of the Directors, (and countersign all checks drawn for the payment of monies aforesaid;) and in his absence, the Vice-President shall perform such duties. Article 6. All applications for insurance shall be made in writing, and signed by the person or agent making such application, and shall specify the amount on the vessel and outfits (catch to be considered as outfits) or cargo separately, insurance to commence on the date of the applica- tion, and shall be binding on both parties until action is taken upon said application by the Directors at their next meeting, and until the expiration of the Policy, unless disapproved by the Directors at that meeting ; notice of such disapproval to be given to the applicant imme- diately after such action. Article 7. No vessel shall be insured by this Company except those hailing from Gloucester. - Article 8. The stock of this Company shall be held in shares valued AwarD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3453 at one thousand dollars each; and for each of such shares held by the stockholders a promissory note of two hundred dollars, payable on demand, with satisfactory security, shall be given to the Company, and - upon each amount of said two hundred dollars, assessment may be levied by the Directors for such sums as may from time to time be re- Quired for the use of the Company. Article 9. All stock notes shall be signed and endorsed before any application for insurance can be received. Article 10. Any responsible person who has property to the amount of five hundred dollars to be insured, may take one-half a share of the stock of the Company, and one share for each additional thousand dol- lars he may wish to have insured. Article 11. After the closing of the stock-book, no person shall retire from the Company, or cease to be a member thereof, but shall be firmly held until the business of the Company for the year shall be settled. Article 12. All matters relating to the government of the Company shall be decided by the Directors in all cases where they are not instructed by the stockholders at a regularly notified meeting. Article 13. The Directors shall call meetings of the stockholders at Such times as they may think proper. And upon notice in writing signed by five or more stockholders, it shall be the duty of the Secretary to call a meeting as requested by them. Article 14. Special meetings of stockholders shall be notified either verbally or by leaving a written or printed notice at each stockholder's place of business two days before the time of holding such meeting. Article 15. Each stockholder shall be entitled to one vote for each share of stock held by him, and in case a person is the holder of a single half share, he shall be entitled to one vote. Article 16. No alteration shall be made in the laws for the government of this Company, except at a regularly notified meeting of the stock- holders, two-thirds of the number of stockholders to constitute a quo- rum for the transaction of business, and two-thirds present acting in the affirmative to decide. Article 17. No loss will be allowed by this Company on the hull of a Vessel, unless said loss or damage shall amount to the following percent- age on the whole value of the vessel as valued in the policy, after de- ducting one-third for new, viz.:- A vessel valued at $7,500 and upwards, 5% per cent. { % “ from 7,000 to $7,500, 6 per cent. * { “ “ 6,500 to 7,000, 6% per cent. & 4 “ “ 6,000 to 6,500, 7 per cent. {{ “ “ 5,500 to 6,000, 73 per cent. { % “ “ 5,000 to 5,500, 8 per cent. { % “ “ 4,500 to 5,000, 9 per cent. {{ “ “ 4,000 to 4,500, 94 per cent. {{ “ “ 3,500 to 4,000, 104 per cent. é & “ “ 3,000 to 3,500, 11 per cent. § { “ “ 2,500 to 3,000, 12 per cent. { % “ “ 2,000 to 2,500, 14 per cent. (, , “ “ 1,500 to 2,000, 18 per cent. { % “ “ 1,000 to 1,500, 25 per cent. All under 1,000 30 per cent. Cables, anchors and boat to be at the risk of the owners in all cases, eXcept a total loss of vessel. Sails, rigging, masts, and all other appurtenances belonging to the Vessel to be at the risk of the owners in all cases, except the loss on 3.454 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. them at one time amounts to the following percentage on the whole value of the vessel as valued in the policy, viz.:- A vessel valued at $8,000, and upwards, 10 per cent. {{ “ from 7,000 to $8,000, 12 per cent. { % {{ { { 6,000 to 7,000, 14 per cent. & 4 {{ { % 5,000 to 6,000, 16 per cent. 64 {{ {{ 4,000 to 5,000, 18 per cent. { % {{ { % 3,000 to 4,000, 20 per cent. & 4 46 & 4 2,000 to 3,000, 24 per cent. { % “ “ 1,500 to 2,000, 30 per cent. All under 1,500 35 per cent. And under such adjustment one-third shall be deducted for new ; but the Directors are authorized and empowered, in case of partial loss, under this article, to compromise with the assured when in their judg- ment it would be for the interest of the Company so to do. - Article 18. Whenever the Directors shall require it, a survey shall be called upon any vessel receiving damages supposed sufficient to entitle them to repairs by the Company, and such repairs when ordered by said survey, shall be made as they shall direct and be done in a faithful and workmanlike manner, and with good materials, one-third to be deducted for new in the adjustment of the loss; said repairs to be made under the direction of the Directors when practicable ; notice of such damage to be given within ten days of the arrival of the vessel, or no loss will be allowed. Article 19. In case any vessel insured by this Company shall be stranded, and the master or owner shall think it for the interest of the Company to get such vessel off and save the property, the Company do hereby pledge themselves to pay their proportion of all reasonable charges which may arise in consequence of such condition, whether successful or not. Article 20. No claim for a total loss shall be allowed by this Com- pany, unless the cost of repairs (according to the laws of the Company,) at one time, after deducting one-third for new, amounts to fifty per cent. of the value of the vessel as in the Policy. Article 21. This Company will insure the outfits or cargo of any Gloucester vessel. The amount to be insured on such outfits or cargo shall be designated in the Policy separately from the vessel, but no claim shall be allowed for the sum so insured, unless the loss amounts to or exceeds 10 per cent. of the value of said outfits or cargo on board at the time of loss, and that loss shall be caused by fire or by the danger of the seas. No claim for loss on, or damage to outfits or cargo carried on deck shall be allowed by the Company. In adjusting losses on out- fits, the whole catch shall be considered as outfits. Article 22. Each and every stockholder shall furnish vessels, outfits or cargo to be insured, the amount of insurance of which shall be at least seven-eighths of the amount of stock subscribed by him ; should he fail to comply with the above requirement, he shall be held to pay the lowest rate of premium on Such sum as shall make the required amount. Article 23. This Company will not be held for any loss or damage by restraint or seizure by any legal or illegal power whatsoever, or for ac- cident or damage which may happen to any vessel while she may be un- der such restraint or seizure. - Article 24. Sixty days from the supposed or known loss of any vessel, the insured may make the same known to the Company, and furnish a written statement of the destination of the vessel, and such other facts as the Directors may deem of importance; and if on mature delibera- AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 3455 tion they should think that sufficient reason has been assigned to cause the belief that the vessel has been lost, they shall cause the Secretary to lay an assessment upon all the stock notes sufficient to cover the loss on the vessel, and such assessment shall be levied and collected within thirty days, and the loss adjusted with the parties forth with. Article 25. In case of disagreement regarding any loss which may take place in this Company, the parties agrieved shall make a written statement of the facts in the case, and the Directors shall also make a similar statement, and if the loss cannot be adjusted by the parties, a reference shall be chosen in the manner pointed out by the laws of the Commonwealth, and, their decision shall be final. And losses shall be made up by some person not interested in the Company when the in- Sured so request. t $ Article 26. This Company will not insure over eight thousand dollars on any one vessel and her outfits or cargo. Article 27. No vessel insured by this Company receiving damage whereby the Company becomes liable, shall in any event be sold until directions to that effect shall have been communicated to the master Or agent from the Company. - Article 28. No vessel shall be insured by this Company for more than seven-eighths of her value as decided upon by the Directors, the owners of the vessel in all cases risking one-eighth of said value. Article 29, Gilt work or carving shall not, when lost or damaged, be paid for by the Company except in case of total loss of vessel. Article 30. Cables or anchors lost or sacrificed on the fishing grounds, shall not be paid for by the Company in any case, except total loss of Vessel. * - Article 31. In adjusting partial losses, the bow-sprit of a vessel shall be considered a spar. - Article 32. No vessel shall sail from the harbor of Gloucester upon any voyage whatever after the fifteenth day of November next, at noon, at the risk of this Company. Any vessel not having arrived from the voyage, she then is on November 15th, at 12 o'clock, noon, shall pay a premium at the rate of one and one-half per cent. per month until her arrival. The Policy on such vessel to be continued until her arrival as aforesaid. º - Article 33. This Company will not, under any circumstances, pay for copper or any other metallic material used as a covering for the bottom of vessels, except in case of total loss, in which case the copper or other material shall belong to the insurers, and copper or other metallic mate- rial used as aforesaid, shall not be considered at all in the adjustment of a partial loss. Article 34. The rates of premium for the current year shall be as follows: From Nov. 16 to Nov. 30 of next year, 9 per cent. { % % 46 £ 6 € $ Dec. 1() “ { % € $ % S é & Jan. 1 : { { % - ‘‘ ‘‘ Sam G. “ 7 * { { % { % 15 “ . . . . . . . 66 { % 6; 6% { % Feb. 1. {{ * {{ {{ { % { % 6 { % { % Mar. 1 < . { % 6 (; 6 % & 4 { % 5; 66 { % Apr. I 4 & { % {{ { { { % § { 5 { % 46 May 15 { % { % ( & & 4 { % { % 4; 6% { % July 1. { % {{ {{ {{ { % { % 4 $6 But when either of said dates shall fall on Sunday, then the premium upon applications made on the next day preceding shall be computed under the rate of the date so occurring on said Sunday. One per cent. on amount insured to be added to the premium of any vessel employed 345 6 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. in the Newfoundland fisheries between the 15th of November and the 1st of March next ensuing. Article 35. A return premium may be allowed whenever any policy issued by this company shall be canceled. Article 36. At the close of the business of the year, if it should appear that a profit had been made in the business of the company, the same shall be divided among the premiums earned by insurance on the stock held by each stockholder; and should there be a loss in the business of the company, the same shall be assessed according to the above-named conditions as regards profit. - - No. 3. FISHING SEHIPPING PAPER. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.— DISTRICT OF GLOU CESTER. IT IS AGREED between , ageut or owner of the Schooner -, qualified by law for carrying on the BANK and other FISHERIES of the United States, and Master or Skipper of the said Schooner, and the Fishermen whose names are to this agree- ment subscribed, that the said will at own expense, equip the said Schooner — with all the necessary tackle and apparel for a fishing voyage or voyages; the provision, salt, and craft shall be provided and paid for by and that said & Master or Skipper, with the said Fishermen will pursue the Cod or other Fisheries, in the Schooner during the present fish- ing season, and will use their best endeavors to procure all the Fish, Oil, &c., they can, and for the success of the voyage or voyages they may go; and will be ready at all times, and will never leave the said Schooner without permission from the Owner or Master thereof. And it is agreed that the owner or Agent may dispose of and sell all the Fish, Oil, &c., that may be landed from the said Schooner whenever he may think proper, and after deducting from the Gross Stock all charges for Ice, Bait, Straw for Bait, and Nippers, the net proceeds to be divided, one-half to the Owner or Owners, the remaining half among the Fishermen, in proportion to the quantity or number of fish which they shall have respectively caught, each iman paying his proportion of the expense of Packing Mackerel, Freight and expense in shipping Fish, &c., home, in accordance with the number or quantity caught, and each one of the Crew with the Skipper to pay an equal part of the following charges, viz: Cooking, Sawing, Wood, Water, Holsting, Medicine, Scraping masts, and tarring rigging. And the said owner doth hereby stipulate and agree with said fishermen, that he will render a just and true account of the delivery and sales of said Fish, Oil, &c. And it is further Agreed between the parties, that the Master or Skip- per, together with the fishermen, are entitled to all the benefits and privi- leges, and subject to all the duties and penalities, provided by a law of the United States, entitled “An Act concerning certain Fisheries of the United States, and for the Regulation and Government of Fishermen employed therein.” | - Time of Entry. Men's Names. Quality. Witness º *sº Time º they | ALPH ABETICAL INDEX. -------- - ----------- A. Aberdeen, Lord : Correspondence with Mr. Everett in relation to the three- mile line-------------------------------------------------------------- Adams, Joseph : Affidavit 256, United States case. ...----...- ... --- - - - - - - - - - Admiralty courts. (See Judgments, Hazen, and Young.) Affidavit of R. M. Cutler on encroachments of United States fishermen; pre- sented to the assembly of Nova Scotia March 23, 1838. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Affidavits of Duncan Hay and Charles Coughlan concerning American encroachments, January 24, 1838--------------------------------------- Affidavits in support of British case, Appendix G : 1. McNeill, Alexander M.: Cavendish, Prince Edward Island. - - - - - - - - - 2. Montgomery, Hugh John : New London, Prince Edward Island. ---- 3. White, John D. : Alberton, Prince Edward Island.----...----...----. 4. Arsineaux, Sylvan F. : Tignish, Prince Edward Island.... . . . . . - - - - - 5. Larkin, Alex. F. : Nail Pond, Prince Edward Island.--...-- - - - - - - - - - 6. Conroy, James: Kildare, Prince Edward Island -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7. White, James F. : Alberton, Prince Edward Island. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8. Gallant, Meddie: Big Mimnigash, Prince Edward Island.----...----. 9. Skerry, James: Cascumpec, Prince Edward Island.-- - - - - - - gº as as tº sº e º 'º º 10. Champion, John : Cascumpec, Prince Edward Island- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11. Davidson, Sebastian : Tignish, Prince Edward Island. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - 12. Champion, William : Cascumpec, Prince Edward Island - - - - - - - - - - - - 13. McDonald, James: East Point, Prince Edward Island. -----. --- - - - - - 14. Davidson, James H. : Tignish, Prince Edward Island- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 15. Campbell, Joseph : Souris, Prince Edward Island. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 16. Chiverie, Alex. : Souris, Prince Edward Island - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 17. Morrisay, James J. : Tignish, Prince Edward Island.----...--------- 18. Hackett, Edward: Tignish, Prince Edward Island. -- - - - - - - - -...-...- ... 19. O'Connor, Maurice: Kildare Cape, Prince Edward Island. -- - - - - - - - - 20. Larkin, Alexander: Alberton, Prince Edward Island. ... -- - - - - - - - - - - 21. Perry, Gilbert : Frog Pond, Prince Edward Island.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 22. Gaudet, Agno J. : Nail Pond, Prince Edward Island.----. -- - - - - - - - - 23. Larkin, William S. : Nail Pond, Prince Edward Island... - - - - - - - - - -. 24. Foley, Michael: Alberton, Prince Edward Island. ---...----- - - - - - - - - 25. Paquet, Marshal: Souris, Prince Edward Island -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 26. Deagle, Peter: Rollo Bay, Prince Edward Island. ... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 27. Prowse, Samuel: Murray Harbor, Prince Edward Island.----------. 28. McPhee, Daniel: Big Pond, Prince Edward Island.--------- - - - - - - - - 29. McFadyen, Malcolm : Murray Harbor, Prince Edward Island. . . . . . . . 30. Dunn, Charles W. : Murray Harbor, Prince Edward Island.---...----. 31. Howlett, James: Georgetown, Prince Edward Island. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - 32. Graham, John : Cavendish, Prince Edward Island. . . . . -- - - - - - - - - - - - 33. McDonald, John R.: St. Margaret's, Prince Edward Island.----...-- 34. McKenzie, Colin: French River, Prince Edward Island. - - - - - - - - - tº dº ſº º 35. Gilman, Alphonso : Malpeque, Priuce Edward Island. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 36. Marshall, E.: Anticosti, Quebec County. --------------------------. 37. Nickerson, James A. : Margaret's Bay, Nova Scotia. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 38. Ingraham, John L. : North Sydney, Cape Breton. -----...----------. 39. McPhee, John J. : Big Pond, Prince Edward Island. ... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 40. McDonald, James: Chepstow, Prince Edward Island .----. - - - - - - - - - 41. Nowlan, James: Souris, Prince Edward Island.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 42. McNeill, John G. : North Rustico, Prince Edward Island. - - - - - - - - - - - 43. McKenzie, George: French River, Prince Edward Island.----- - - - - - - 44. Paint, Peter, Sr. : Port Hawkesbury, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 45. Lawrence, George C. : Port Hastings, Nova Scotia.----...-- - - - - - - - - - 46. Hadley, James B. : Port Mulgrave, Nova Scotia. -------------...----. 47. Crispo, Michael : Harbor au Bouche, Nova Scotia. ---...-- - - - - - - - - - - - 48. Munn, Robert Stewart : Harbor Grace, Newfoundland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1461 1462, 1463 1091 1092 1093 1095 1096 1099 1100 1102 ’1104 '1105 1107 1108 1110 1111 1113 1114 1115 3.117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1121 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1130 1132 1134 1135 1137 1139 1140 1142 1145 1147 1149 1151 1153 1154 1157 1158 1159 1161. 1162 217 F 3458 A.I.PHABETICAL INDEX. Affida 49 50. 51. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. vits in support of British case, Appendix G–Continued. . Hayward, James S. : St. John’s, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hayward, James S. : St. John's, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rogerson, James J. : St. John’s, Newfoundland. ... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Deneff, Joseph P. : Gloucester, Mass.-----------...------------------- 3. Molloy, William H. : Gloucester, Mass.----, -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -----. ---. . Rose, George : Little Bay, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. . Evans, John : English Harbor, Newfoundland. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5. Rose, John : Belloram, Newfoundland. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -----...----. . Hubert, Philip : Harbor Breton, Newfoundland - - - - - -...----...-- - - - - . Snellgrove, George T. R. : St. Jacques, Newfoundland. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - . Giovanninni, Henry : Rencontre, Newfoundland -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Snook, James P. : Fortune, Newfoundland.----...- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Bennett, William George : Fortune, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Hickman, Samuel G. : Grand Bank, Newfoundland . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Benning, Henry: Lamalin, Newfoundland.------------------------- . Reeves, James: St. Lawrence, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Vavasseur, Hugh : St. Lawrence, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Winter, Thomas: Burin, Newfoundland -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Pine, Philip : Burin Bay, Newfoundland. ---------...----------. ---- . Collins, William, Burin, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Pine, Owen : Burin Bay, Newfoundland. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Paul, Richard : Burin Bay, Newfoundland ...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Berteau, Francis : Burin, Newfoundland .--------...-----...---------- . McGrath, Richard: Oderin, Newfoundland -- - - - - - - - - - - - ------------ . Pennell, Henry : Trepany, Newfoundland.----. -------------------- . Leary, Patrick: Renews, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Jackman, Michael : Renews, Newfoundland.-- - - - - - - - - - - - ---------- . White, John : Ferryland, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. sº . Morry, Robert : Caplin Bay, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Winser, Peter: Aquaforte, Newfoundland.----. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cashin, Richard : Cape Broyle, Newfoundland.----. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - tº º . Roberts, Thomas C. : Cape Canso, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Richard, James S. : Getson's Cove, Nova Scotia.--., ----- - - - - - - - - - - - . Groser, Jacob : Lower La Have, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Jost, Nathaniel: Lunenburg Town, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Smith, Charles: Lunenburg Town, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - tº me tº as sº ... Wentzler, Benjamin : Lower La Have, Nova Scotia.----...-- - - - - - - - - . Conrad, George: South Village, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * . Cook, Geoffrey: Rose Bay, Nova Scotia ----- tº ea as as as sº º is sº s = e s as sº sº º is sº sº sº ºn e . Getson, Daniel : Getson's Cove, Nova Scotia. ----- .* * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - Z . Risser, Dan. : Rose Bay, Nova Scotia.------------------------------ . Spearwater, James W. : New Dublin, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Zwicker, William N. : Lunenburg Town, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4-> . Lohnes, Isaac : Middle La Have, Nova Scotia ----------...----------- . Fortune, Lawrence: Toad’s Cove, Newfoundland.----...-- - - - - - - - - - - . Carew, Thomas: Shore's Cove, Newfoundland.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Barnes, Charles James: St. John’s, Newfoundland.----...----...----- . Grouchy, Philip : Pouch Cove, Newfoundland , -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Tulk, William : Portugal Cove, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * . Picot, James: Portugal Cove, Newfoundland.----...----------- - - - - - ... Tucker, Daniel: Broad Cove, Newfoundland .----...----...---------- . Tewis, Philip : Holyrood, Newfoundland.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... --- - - - - - - . O’Brien, Edward: Cats Cove, Newfoundland.----...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Wade, Edward : Cats Cove, Newfoundland.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Butler, George : Northern Gut, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Parsons, Stephen : Bay Roberts, Newfoundland........ -- - - - - - - - - - - - - . Barrett, John : Spaniard’s Bay, Newfoundland... -- ºr tº sº º sº º sº º sm as as º ºs ºn tº gº º . Hopkins, Alfred: Heart's Content, Newfoundland .....------------.- . Newhook, Thomas L. : New Harbor, Newfoundland. -- - - - - - - - - - ---. e . Morse, Edward: Dildo, Newfoundland .....---- tº m an e º is a s º is as tº es e º ºs ºs º as a . McKay, Alexander: North Sydney, Nova Scotia. --...- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . McLeod, James: North Sydney, Nova Scotia ...---- :º º ºs e º ºs ºn as is as sº sº º ºs º we nº & . Nearing, William : Main-à-Dieu, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - * - - - - - - - - - - - - Lahey, Thomas : Main-à-Dieu, Nova Scotia ------------------------ Goodwin, Daniel: Cape Canso, Nova Scotia .----------...----------- Kelly, William : Lingan, Nova Scotia ------------------------------ Archibald, Isaac : Cow Bay, Nova Scotia.-- - - - - - - - - - -. ss ºs ºn tº sº as as me sº º ºs º is sº Dobson, Joseph : South Sydney, Nova Scotia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ALPEIABETICAL INDEX. 3459 Affidavits in support of British case, Appendix G–Continued. Peach, John : Cow Bay, Nova Scotia.----------------------------- 4- Fraser, James: South Bar, Nova Scotia ---------------------------- Ferguson, John : Cow Bay, Nova Scotia.--------------------------- Murphy, John : Lingan, Nova Scotia ------------------------------ Matheson, Angus: South Sydney, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sweet, William H. : Fall River, Mass ------ s tº * * * * tº gº tº ſº tº tº dº tº gº tº a tº º is ſº gº tº º Archibald, James: Boston, Mass. ---------------------------------- Thomas, Richard: Booth Bay, Me-------------. -------------------- Hamilton, John R. : New Carlisle, Quebec.-------------------...----- Conture, Baptiste: Grand River, Gaspé.-------------------------- Hall, Edward G. : New Carlisle, Quebec ---------------------------- Gardner, William Edward: Louisburg, Nova Scotia.----...---------- Lemontais, Philip : Arichat, Nova Scotia.------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Smyth, Christopher: Port Hood, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brand, John I. : Pubnico, Nova Scotia.----------------------------- Hirtle, Edward: Lunenburg Town, Nova Scotia -------------------- Riser, Rufus: Rose Bay, Nova Scotia ----------...------------------- Morien, John : Port Medway, Nova Scotia.----------...------------- Smeltzer, John : Lunenburg Town, Nova Scotia --------...----- * * * * * * * Richards, Elias: Getson's Cove, Nova Scotia ----------------------- Getson, James: Getson's Cove, Nova Scotia ------------------------ Publicover, James: New Dublin, Nova Scotia -----...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - McDougall, Donald : Main-à-Dieu, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Bagnall, John : Gabarus, Nova Scotia.----------------------------- Bosdet, Peter: West Arichat, Nova Scotia. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - • - - - - - - - - - Marmean, Francis : Arichat, Nova Scotia -------------------------- Grouchy, David : Descousse, Nova Scotia -------------------------. Le Blanc, Isidore : Arichat, Nova Scotia --------------------------- Murphy, Bryan : Port Hood, Nova Scotia. --. ------...--------------- Perris, Simon : West Arichat, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * ſº º gº º Crichton, William : West Arichat, Nova Scotia.----- of = e is us ºr es e s ºn tº se e s sº Levesconte, Isaac : Arichat, Nova Scotia -----------------------. -- Wentzel, William : Moose Harbor, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Gardner, Pardon : Port Mouton, Nova Scotia.------------- - - - - - - - - - McLeod, George: Brooklyn, Nova Scotia. --------------------------- Lloyd, John : Port Mouton, Nova Scotia --------------------------- McDonald, Robert J. : Port Jollie, Nova Scotia. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Frehil, William : Arichat, Nova Scotia. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * Diggdon, Philip : Port Medway, Nova Scotia. ---- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * McDonald, Michael: Whitehaven, Nova Scotia. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Murphy, George : Port Hood, Nova Scotia.------------------------- Phelan, James: Arichat, Nova Scotia ------------------------------ Robertson, Hilaire: Griffin's Cove, Gaspé, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - West, Donald: Grand Grève, Gaspé, Quebec ------...--------------- McInnis, Michael : Port Daniel, Quebec. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - is gº º dº gº º ºs º º tº Rogerson, Hon. James J. : St. John's, Newfoundland.----------...--- Mercer, Isaac : Bay Roberts, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Fiander, Samuel : Coombs Cove, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Bishop, George : Burin, Newfoundland----------------------------- Hickman, George Ambrose: Grand Bank, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - Lake, John, Sr. : Fortune, Newfoundland.--------------------------- Simms, George : Grand Bank, Newfoundland. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Holman, Henry T. : Harbor Breton, Newfoundland. ..... ----...----. Legresby, John : Point St. Peter, Quebec--------------------------- Fauvel, John B. : Point St. Peter, Quebec. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Legros, John : Point St. Peter, Quebec. ---------------------------- Collas, Adolphus E. : Point St. Peter, Quebec-...--------...-------...-- Orange, Daniel: Paspebiac, Quebec.------------------. ------------ Mourant, Joshua : Paspebiac, Quebee.----------------------------- LeBlanc, Frank: Port Daniel, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remon, Thomas C. : Little Pabos, Quebec.--------...--------------- O'Connor, William : Little Pabos, Quebec. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Luce, John M. : Grande Greve, Quebec. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Price, Henry : Grande Greve, Quebec.-----------------...----------- Hyman, William : Cape de Rosier, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Gavey, Abraham : Grande Greve, Quebec. ------------...----...------ Ferguson, Peter: L'Ance au Beaufils, Quebec. ...----...- .... -- - - - - - - - - 184. Baker, Christopher: Cape Cove, Quebec .................. tº as sº * * * * * * Page. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151. 152. 153. 154. 155. 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168. 169. 170. 171. 172. 173. 174. 175. 176. 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 182. 183. 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1243 1244 1244 1246 1247 1248 1249. 1251 1252. 1254 1256. 1256. 1258. 1260. 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1273 1274 1275 1:275 1276 1276 1977 1278 1280 1280 1281 1283 1284 1286 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1301 1302 1303 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309. 3460 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Affidavits in support of British case, Appendix G–Continued. 185. 186. 187. 188. 189. 190. 191. #92. 193. 194. 195. 196. 397. }98. 199. 200. 201. 202. 203. 204. 205. 206. 207. 208. 209. 210. 211. 212. 213. 214. 215. 216. 17. 218. 219. 220. 221. 223. 224. 225. 226. 227. 228. 229. 230. 231. 232. 234. 235. 236. 237. 238. 239. 240. 241. 242. 243. 244. 245. 246. 247. 248. 249. 250, 251. 252, Phillips, David : Peninsula, Gaspé, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Miller, Richard: Peninsula, Gaspé, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rooney, James: Percé, Quebec ------------------------------------ LeBrun, Francis : Percé, Quebec.----------------------------------- Johnstone, William : Magdalen Islands, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Eournier, Charles : Magdalen River, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Noil, Alexis: Fox River, Quebec. ---------------------------------- Packwood, John : Cape Rosier, Quebec. ...----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Tapp, Mesiah : Fox River, Quebec--------------------------. ------ Samuel, James: Fox River, Quebec.-------------------------------. Trachy, Edward : Percé, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - : º ºs ºn sº ºn º ºr as sº s = * * * * * Bunn, Edward: Fox River, Quebec -------------------------------- Payson, Joseph D. : Westport, New Brunswick . . . . . . . . . -- - - - - - - ... • * * * Cook, Thomas C. : Cape Canso, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - -, -----------. Wyse, William : Chatham, New Brunswick - - - - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - - - - - - - Flynn, James: Percé, Quebec ------------------------------------- Flynn, Edmund : Percé, Quebec. -----------------. ---------------- Vardon, John : Mal Bay, Quebec ---------------------------------- Dumaresq, George : Fox River, Quebec -----. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Campion, Alexander : Magdalen River, Quebec -----, -------------- Malouin, Alexis: Griffin's Cove, Quebec.--...----- 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Gaul, Charles : Douglas Town, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---. Tapp, Robert : Fox River, Quebec. -------------------------------- McCauley, Luke : Douglas Town, Quebec. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --...----. McRay, Thomas : Gaspé, Quebec ---------------------------------- Noil, Francis : Fox River, Quebec -----------------------------. --- Jessop, James: Newport, Quebec ---------------------------------- Hammond, S. B. : Lockeport, Nova Scotia. ------------------------- Lloyd, William : Lockeport, Nova Scotia. ---...--------...----------. Alexander, James W. : Point St. Peters, Quebec. - - - - - - - - - - - - . . ----- Privel, George : St. George, of Mal Bay, Quebec. -...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IDevot, Daniel: Magdalen Islands, Quebec. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sinette, Joseph : Griffin's Cove, Quebec. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Phelan, John : Port Daniel, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - tº º ºs sº sº up as sº e º ºs as as Lafrance, Sixte : Magdalen Islands, Quebec ------------------------ Cormier, Gabriel : Magdalen Islands, Quebec. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Conway, Edward A. : Gaspé, Quebec. -----. ------------------------ Sirois, Philias: L'Islet, Quebec ---------, -------------------------- Renouf, John ; Carlisle, Quebec ------------------------------------ Bower, William Francis : Point St. Peter, Quebec. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Boudreau, Hyppolyte: Esquimaux Point, Quebec. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cormier, Francis: Esquimaux Point, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Doyle, Placide: Esquimaux Point, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cormier, Gabriel : Esquimaux Point, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Boudreau, Nathaniel : Esquimaux Point, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Boudreau, Julien : Esquimaux Point, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Touzel, Philip : Sheldrake, Quebec -------------------------------- Bouchard, Samuel : Magdalen Islands, Quebec. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Seaboyer, Gabriel: Lower LaHave, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mullins, Patrick : South Bar, Sydney, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rooney, Michael : Douglas Town, Quebec -------------------------. Briord, Peter : Douglas Town, Quebec ------. ---------------------- Kennedy, Andrew : Douglas Town, Quebec ------------------------ Brochu, Pierre : Seven Islands, Quebec ---------------------------. Chouinard, Isaac : Cape Chat, Quebec ----------------------...----- Locke, Austen : Lockeport, Nova Scotia.--------------------------- McAdams, Daniel : Lockeport, Nova Scotia ------------------------ Fournier, Messie : Grande Valée, Quebec. --...----------------------- Haddon, William : Grosse Isle, Quebec - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - tº ºn tº ſº ºn º Carter, John : Port Mouton, Nova Scotia...-----...----. -------------- McLeod, William : Port Daniel, Quebec.--------------...----------. Matthews, Allan : East Ragged Islands, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Murray, David, jr. : Port Mulgrave, Nova Scotia. ----------...-- - - - - - Condon, Thomas: Guysboro’, Nova Scotia -----------...------------- McKenzie, Alexander: Crow Harbor, Nova Scotia ... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Robertson, Michael : Port Jollie, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Publicover, Geoffrey W. : Getson's Cove, Nova Scotia. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - Seaboyer, James S. : Rose Bay, Nova Scotia.----. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page. 1311 1312 1312 1314 1315 1316 1317 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1326 1326 1328 1329 1330 1332 1333 1335 1336 1337 1338 1340 1341 1342 1344 1344 1345 1346 1348 1349 1351 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1359 1359 1360 1360 1361 1363 1364 1365 1367 1369 1369 1370 1371 1373 1374 1375 1377 1378 1379 1379 1380 1380 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. 3461 Affidavits in support of British case, Appendix G–Continued. 253. 254. 255. 256. 257. 258. 259. 260. 261. 262. 264. 265. 266. 267. 268. 269, 270. 271. 272. 273. 274. 275. 276. 277. 278. 279. 280. 281. 282. 283. 284. 285. 286. 287. 288. 289. 290. 291. 292. 293. 2.94. 295. 296. 297. 298. 299. 300. 301. 302. . McLeod, John Artemas: Kensington, Prince Edward Island - - - - - - - - . McDonald, James: Chepstow, Prince Edward Island ... - - - - - - - - - - - - . McCormack, Daniel: Black Bush, Prince Edward Island.-- - - - - - - - - - . McDonald, Angus: Souris, Prince Edward Island . . . . .----- - - - - - - - - . McDonald, Peter: Souris, Prince Edward Island. - ... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - . McIntyre, John : Fairfield, Prince Edward Island - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . McDonald, Michael : French River, Prince Edward Island - - - - - - - - - - . Walsh, Thomas: Souris, Prince Edward Island-...- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Doviant, Dominick: North Rustico, Prince Edward Island.-- - - - - - - - - . Carson, Robert : North Rustico, Prince Edward Island.----. -- - - - - - - 3. McEachan, Charles : Township No. 46, Prince Edward Island. -----. 3.15. McLean, Daniel C. : Black Bush, Prince Edward Island - - - - - - - - - - - - 15. 316. . Cousins, James W. : Digby Town, Nova Scotia- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3íð. Swain, David : Port Clyde, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.19. Ritcey, Thomas, Sr. : Lower La Have, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Smith, William D. : Port Hood, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Skinner, Archibald B. : Port Hastings, Nova Scotia. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Munroe, William : Whitehaven, Nova Scotia-...- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Munroe, Matthew : Whitehaven, Nova Scotia . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * g e º gº º Rennels, Isaac W. : Port Hood, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * se is tº McAdams, John : Port Jollie, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. Campbell, Donald : Port Mouton, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Richard, John Daniel: LaHave Island, Nova Scotia --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - McLeod, Colin : Brooklyn, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - tº sº º sº sº s m sº sº, sº º Bushen, James: Port Mouton, Nova Scotia -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Gardiner, John P. : Cape Sable Island, Nova Scotia. . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Gillies, Alexander : Port Hood, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * tº E gº tº gº ºn Hemlow, Henry, Sr. : Liscomb, Nova Scotia . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Watts, William : Port Hood, Nova Scotia .... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . Smith, Joshua : Port Hope Island, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Coggins, Livingston : Westport, Nova Scotia- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Wentzel, Martin : Lower LaHave, Nova Scotia. . . . . . . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Christian, William B. : Prospect, Nova Scotia ... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - McDonald, Alexander: Port Hood Island, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - Gillies, Angus: Port Hood, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Fraser, James O. : St. John’s, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Bethell, John : West Barcrow, Nova Scotia- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Tremain, Edward D. : Port Hood, Nova Scotia ----. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Currie, Robert : Louis Harbor, Nova Scotia . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. Matthews, Parker: Black Point, Nova Scotia -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Deagle, Robert : Souris, Prince Edward Island . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Carey, James: Port Mulgrave, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Pinkham, Thomas : Booth Bay, Maine - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Harlow, Reuben : Shelburne, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Smith, Judah C.: Barrington, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Outhouse, Amos H. : Tiverton, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Merchant, John : Hardwicke, Nova Scotia. . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Trask, Wallace: Little River, Nova Scotia - ... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mosley, George E. : Tiverton, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Payson, Charles H. : Westport, Nova Scotia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crowell, Eleazer : Clarke's Harbor, Nova Scotia -----...---...-- - - - - - Kenny, Daniel W. : Cape Sable Island, Nova Scotia ... ---...-- - - - - - - - Merritt, Gilbert : Sandy Cove, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Denton, Charles W. : Little River, Nova Scotia .----. as º ºs sº tº sº tº gº tº gº tº gº tº gº Denton, Joseph E. : Little River, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - McKay, John ; Tiverton, Nova Scotia. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Outhouse, Whitefield : Tiverton, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Snow, John W.; Digby, Nova Scotia ------...-----------...----------. Foster, James Patterson : Port Williams, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ladd, Byron P. : Yarmouth, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Thurston, Abram : Sanford, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ryerson, Samuel M. : Yarmouth, Nova Scotia - - - - ...... -- - - - - - - - - - - Eakins, Robert S., jr. : Yarmouth, Nova Scotia. -- ... --.' -- - - - - - - - - - - Ross, Daniel : North Rustico, Prince Edward Island. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - McIntyre, Daniel: Black Bush, Prince Edward Island.---- ge & sº sº as sº e = is Milner, Thomas: Parker's Cove, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Bolman, Robert Henry : Sand Point, Nova Scotia - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Page 13Sº 1388 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1397 1397 1398 1398 1400 1401 1403 1405 1405 1406 1407 1409 1410 1411 1411 1412 1412 1413 1414 1416 1416 1416 1417 1418 1420 1420 1421 1421 1422 1423 1423 1424 1425 1425 1426 1427 1427 1428 1429 1431 1432 1433 1436 1437 1438 1440 1442 1444 1445 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451. 1452 1453 1454 1455. 3462 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Affidavits in rebuttal, in support of British case: 1. Rumsey, Thomas: St. John’s, Newfoundland ----. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2 . Inkpen, Robert : Burin, Newfoundland------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3. Power, Stephen : Placentia, Newfoundland. ... --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4. Fiander, Stephen : Coombs Cove, Newfoundland. --...- * - - - - - - - - - - - - - § Thornhill, Philip : Anderson Cove, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7 8 Rose, George : Jersey Harbor, Newfoundland. ...----. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -. . Bonia, Maurice: Placentia, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - -...--------. . Sullivan, Humphry : Placentia, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Affidavits produced on behalf of the United States: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5 5. :* 4 • { I ; Hodgdon, Freeman : Boothbay, Me --------------------------------- Berry, Thomas: Boothbay, Me ------------------------------------- Eaton, William : Castine, Me------------------------------. ---. ---- Crane, L. G. : Gouldsborough, Me ------...-------------------------- . Willard, Henry E. : Cape Elizabeth, Me - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Trufant, Albert T. : Harpswell, Me - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Willard, Enoch G. : Portland, Me----------------------------------- . Trefethen, George : Portland, Me - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Conley, John : Portland, Me - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . Whitten, O. B. : Portland, Me .------------------------------------- . Chase, Stephen B. : Portland, Me-...-----...----------. -----...--------- . Rich, Marshall N. : Portland, Me-...---------------------- • * * * * * * * * * * * • Swett, Noah : Wellfleet, Mass------------...----------. -------------- . Pettingill, Charles C. : Salem, Mass. ------...------------------------- . Nelson, William H. : Plymouth, Mass -----...------------------------ . Small, Asa W.; Nantucket, Mass ----------------------------------. . Smalley, Charles E. : Keltny, Reuben C., Nantucket, Mass - - - - - - - - - -. . Crowell, Elisha : Brooklyn, N. Y. ----...------------------------------ . Nickerson, Caleb : Brooklyn, N. Y. ---------------------------------. . Babson, Horatio: Gloucester, Mass ...----. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . Friend, Sydney, & Brother: Gloucester, Mass. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Plumer, George W. : Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Inowlton, Harvey : Horton, Edward A., Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - . Pierce, Albion K. ; Bearse, George ; Hamilton, James R. ; McDonald, John ; Gloucester, Mass. ------------------------------------ ---- 5. Norwood, George; Ayer, James S. : Gloucester, Mass. ...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Leighton, Andrew ; Falt, Walter M.: Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Wonson, William C. : Gloucester, Mass-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. . Friend, George, & Co.: Gloucester, Mass.--------------. ------------ . Gerring, Frederick: Gloucester, Mass. ------------------------------ . Wonson, Frederick G. : Gloucester, Mass. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Pew, Charles H. : Gloucester, Mass -----------------...--------. ----- . Mansfield, Alfred : Gloucester, Mass -----------------...------------. . Steele, George: Gloucester, Mass.-----------------------------------. . Smith, Sylvanus : Gloucester, Mass --------...----------...-----------. . Whelen, Morris: Gloucester, Mass ---------------------------------- . Grady, Thomas: Gloucester, Mass ---------------------------------. . Tarr, James G. : Gloucester, Mass. --------------------------------, - . Gorman, John E. : Gloucester, Mass. ---------. --------...----- ... • * * * * * * * . Warren, Nicholas: Gloucester, Mass--------------------------------. . Hardy, Henry: Gloucester, Mass ...----------------...------ as ºf 3 as as º º ºs º as i. Saunders, John E. : Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----. . Hannan, Richard: Gloucester, Mass...------------------------------- . Morey, Stephen B. : Deer Island, Me-...---------------...-----------.. ... Webb, Seth ; Webb, C. H. S. : Deer Island, Me----------...----...----. . Staples, Jolin: Swan's Island, Me. ---------------------------------. . Perkins Brothers: Gloucester, Mass. -------------------------------- . PeW, John J., & Son: Gloucester, Mass ----------------------------- . Smith & Oakes : Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - gº tº tº dº tº ſº tº - - - - - - - - - - - . Walen, Michael : Gloucester, Mass. --------------------------------- . Pettingell, Charles D. : Gloucester, Mass ----------------...---------. . Maddox, B., & Co. : Gloucester, Mass ,----------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Dennis, George, & Co.: Gloucester, Mass --------------------------- . Proctor, Joseph O. : Gloucester, Mass------------------------------- . Haskell, Samuel: Gloucester, Mass --------------------------------- . Friend, Joseph : Gloucester, Mass ---------------------------------. . Lane, Samuel, & Brother: Gloucester, Mass. ...------------------------ Steele, George : Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Cunningham & Thompson : Gloucester, Mass. ...--------...----. ------- ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Affidavits produced on behalf of the United States—Continued. 59. 60, . Sayward, Epes, jr. : Sayward, George, Gloucester, Mass. -- - - - - - - - - - - - Dennis & Ayer: Gloucester, Mass -----------------------------. ---- Wonson, William C. : Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sayward, Daniel: Gloucester, Mass -----. -------------------------- . Parsons, William, 2d, & Co.: Gloucester, Mass -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Wonson & Co. (Wonson Brothers): Gloucester, Mass. ---. * * * * * * * * * * * . Norwood, George, & Son: Gloucester, Mass. ------..... -------------. . Whalen, Leonard: Gloucester, Mass -------------------------------- . Rowe & Jordan: Gloucester, Mass. --------------------------------- . Knowlton, Harvey, jr. : Gloucester, Mass --- - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . Friend, Sidney : Gloucester, Mass ---------------------------------. . Low, Benjamin (David Low & Co.): Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Leighton & Co.: Gloucester, Mass. -----------...-----------...--------. . Tarr, James G., & Brother: Gloucester, Mass... ----. - - - - - - - - - - '• * ~ * ~ * . Smith & Golt : Gloucester, Mass -------...----------------------- - - - - . Clarke & Somes: Gloucester, Mass--------------------------------- . Wonson, John F., & Co.: Gloucester, Mass- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - • Proctor, A. G. : Gloucester, Mass ----------------------------------- . Smith, Aaron ; Thomas, Jerome B. : Gloucester, Mass -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Burrill, E., & Co.: Newburyport, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * . Boardman, T. H., & Co. : Newburyport, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Ireland & Trefethen : Newburyport, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. . Bayley, R., & Son : Newburyport, Mass -----. ---------------------- . Currier, Charles O. : Newburyport, Mass. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * tº º ºs º sº sº sº as sº tº . Union Wharf Company: Provincetown, Mass ...----...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Central Wharf Company : Provincetown, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Cook, H. & S., & Co.: Provincetown, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Freeman, F. M.: Provincetown, Mass.----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Freeman & Hilliard: Provincetown, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . ----- . Crocker & Atwood: Provincetown, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Cook, E. & E. K. : Provincetown, Mass. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - sº º sº º ºs & . Payne, J. & L. N. : Provincetown, Mass ---------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - . Whorf, Philip A. : Provincetown, Mass.----...---------...----------- 2. Lewis, B. A., & Co.: Provincetown, Mass -----...---...----...------- . Conwell, David : Provincetown, Mass. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Central Wharf Company: Wellfleet, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5. Commercial Wharf Company : Wellfleet, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Mercantile Wharf Company : Wellfleet, Mass... ----...-- - - - - - - - - -- . . . . Nickerson, Henry : Dennisport, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - w is gº tº gº tº ºs . Nelson & Harlow : Plymouth, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * † tº ºs ºs tº . Manter & Blackmer: Plymouth, Mass -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------ . Tower, Abraham H. : Cohasset, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------ . Bates, John : Cohasset, Mass . ----. --- - - - - - - - - -----. as tº sº as a wº, º sº sº º º ºs º º tº wº . Baker & Ellis: Dennisport, Mass. ------------------------...--------- 3. Eldridge, Levi: South Chatham, Mass. -- - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ... Weekes, D. F. : South Harwich, Mass ...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Small, Caleb : South Harwich, Mass. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Doane, Valentine: Harwich Port, Mass. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Baker, T. B. : Harwich Port, Mass------------------...------------- . Doane, W., jr., & Co.: Portsmouth, N. H.-----,----...--------------- . Tredick, C. Morris: Portsmouth, N. H. . . . . ----...----------. --...----- . Frye, James: North Haven and Camden, Me - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Tolman, George : Deer Isle, Me---------------------------...--------- • Willard, E. G. : Portland, Me--------------------------------------- . Jordan & Blake: Portland, Me------------------------------------- . Lewis, Whitten & Co.: Portland, Me.--------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . Dyer, Charles A. : Portland, Me.----...----------------------------- . Jordan, W. S., & Co.: Portland, Me ---...---------------------------. . Trefethen, George, & Co.: Portland, Me. ----...----. • * g º º ºs º dº sº ºne º e º sº tº * * . Sawyer, J. W., & Co.: Portland, Me---------------------...---------- . Thomes, Chase & Co.: Portland, Me. ----...------------------------- . Chase, E. H. : Portland and Boothbay, Me.-------------------------. 133. Trefethen, C. & H. : Portland, Me--------------...----------...----- . Maddocks, William T. : Southport, Me. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------- . Orne, Freeman : Southport, Me. ----. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 125. 126. Chase & Cushing : Portland, Me----------------------------------- Peirce, Moses E., & Co.: Boothbay, Me - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hodgdon, Stephen G. : Boothbay, Me...... ---. ... ... ---...----------. 3464 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Affidavits produced on behalf of the United States–Continued. 127. Lewis, Allen : Boothbay, Me-------------. ----------------- • * * * * * * * *e 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151. 152. 153. 154. 155. 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163, 164. 165. 166. 167. 168. 169. 170. 171. 172. 173. 174. 175. 176. 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 182. 183. 184. 185. 186. 187. 188. 189, 190. 191. 192. 193. 194. Hodgåon, Albion P. : Boothbay, Me---. --------------, -------------- Maddocks, Luther: Boothbay, Me -----...--------------------------. Reed, Levi: Boothbay, Me-------. ---------------------------------- Blake, Charles C. : Boothbay, Me...---------------------------------- McDougall & Race: Boothbay, Me----...---------------------------. Nickerson, S., & Sons. : Boothbay, Me - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------------- McClintock, John & Co. : Boothbay, Me - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Stinson, Michael: Swan's Island, Me. -- - - - - - - - «s tº sº º º 'º & sº tº ſº tº tº º tº sº gº tº * * * * * * McDonald, Lewis: North Haven, Me.------------------------------- Wasgatt, C., & Co.: Swan's Island, Me ------------------------------ Fitch, James: New London, Conn.---------------------------------- Weaver, C. A., & Co.: New London Conn -------------------------- Brown, H. A., & Co.: New London, Conn.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Harvey, William : Auld's Cove, St. of Canso ,----. •y is e s = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * McEachren, Donald: New Town, St. of Canso. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Jackman, Richard: Port Mulgrave -----------. --------------------- Smith, Thomas Charles: Port Hood Island, C. B - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Strahan, Asberry: Auld's Cove, Canso.... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... sº me º ºs º ºs º sm tº sº * Smith, Nathaniel: Port Hood Island, C. B. - - - - - - - - - - - -...----------. . Cameron, Hugh : New Town, Canso. - ...----. -----------...------------- Johnson, James: Port Hastings, C. B. ------------------------------ Fox, Thomas Edward : Fox Pond, Canso.------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - McAlpine, William H. : Louisburg, C. B. -----. ---------------------- Townsend, Joseph : Louisburg, C. B -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----------------- Peeples, James: Pirate Cove, N. S.----------------------------------- Peeples, Samuel P. : Pirate Cove, N. S.----. -----------------------. Crittenden, Isaiah : Pirate Cove, N. S.---------. --------------------- Crittenden, E. Aug. : Pirate Cove, N. S.------------------------------ Peeples, Ebenezer C. : Pirate Cove, N. S.---------------------------- Peeples, Samuel H. : Port Mulgrave. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -...----...----. McNair, James: Port Mulgrave.------------------------------------ Murray, John ; Port Mulgrave-------------------------------------- Ingraham, John H. : North Sydney, C. B.----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------- Moore, William H. : North Sydney, C. B. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , . McDonald, Allan : Cape Jack, N. S... --. tº ºi nº sº tº tº tº º ºs º ºs ºs ºn tº * * * * tº ºi º º sº s = º ſº º McDonald, Donald: Cape Jack, N. S.-------------------------------- Crispo, Michael : Harbor Bouché, N. S.------------------------------ Webb, Patrick: Harbor Bouché, N. S. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Gillis, James: Cape Jack, N. S.------------------------------------- Embree, William : Bear Island, Canso, N. S. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Stuart, Charles : Bear Island, Canso, N. S.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------- Levanger, Edward : Harbor Bouché, N. S.--------------------------- Langley, George : Bear Island, St. of Canso.------------------------- McPherson, Hugh : Bear Island, St. of Canso.------------------------ Embree, Chandler : Bear Island, St. of Canso.-----------------...----. Cohoon, Solomon : Cape Canso, N. S.-------------------------------- Cook, Thomas C. : Cape Canso, N. S.-------------------------...------ Hart, Alfred W. : Cape Canso, N. S.---------------------------------- McKeen, James G. : Port Hastings, St. of Canso.-------...------------ Bunker, George : Margaret Bay, N. S.-------------------------------- Marmeau, Francis: Arichat, Isle Madame---------------------------- Girrois, James L. : Arichat, Isle Madame---. ------------------------ LeBlanc, Isidore : Arichat, Isle Madame. ----...---------------------- LeBlanc, Simon P. : W. Arichat, Isle Madame ---------. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - Theriot Simon (Terrio): W. Arichat, Isle Madame------...----...---... Le Vesconte, William : Isle Madame, C. B. - - - - - - - - - - -...----...------- Doyle, Charles: Rocky Bay, Isle Madame.---------...----------...----. Gruchy, David : Isle Madame, C. B.-----------------------...------- Grant, John : Hawkesbury, St. of Canso.----...----------, ---------- Walsh, Patrick: Steep Creek, N. S.-------...----------------------- Critchet, George: Middle Milford, N. S.----...----...----...-- - - - - - - - - - Carrigan, Christopher : Lower Milford, N. S.-----------------------... England, William T. : Middle Milford, N. S.----------...----...-- - - - - Ryan, Martin : Middle Milford, N. S.------------------------------- Ryan, Philip : Middle Milford, N. S.--------------. ----...----------. Laurie, Andrew : Lower Milford, N. S. - - - - - * * * * * *º tº º is ºs º ºs º ºn tº ſº º 'º º te sº tº sº tº ſº. England, Thomas : Middle Milford, N. S. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... ALPHABETICAL INDEX. 3465 Page. Affidavits produced on behalf of the United States—Continued. g 195. Carrigan, Rufus : Lower Milford, N. S.----------...----. ---...------- 3265 196. Walsh, Edward : Lower Milford, N. S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * º ºs dº tº a 3265 197. Lowrie, Charles : Middle Milford, N. S. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3266 198. Nicholson, Nicholas: Port Hastings, St. of Canso - - - - - - - - - - - -., - - - - - - - 3267 199. McEachren, Duncan : Craignish County, C. B.-- - - - - --...----.. --- - - - 3268 200. Laidlaw, George : Craignish County, C. B.--. ----...--...-------------- 3269 201. McDonald, Roderick: Low Point, N. S.--...------...--------. -- - - - - - y- 3270 202. McDonald, Daniel: Low Point, N. S. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3271 203. McKinnon, Dougald : Long Point, N. S.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3272 204. Morgan, Moses C.: Halifax, N. S.-----------------------------...----- 3273 205. Beazley, Richard : Halifax, N. S.------------------------------------ 3276 206. Glazebrook, John : Halifax, N. S.----------------------------------- 3278 207. Hays, William : Halifax, N. S.------------------------------------- 3280 208. Molloy William [A.] : Newfoundland.---------...----...--------------- 3282 209. Griffin, Levi: St. John’s, Newfoundland.--...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3283 210. Cobb, Henry A. : St. John's, Newfoundland.--------. ... --- - - - - - - - - - - 3284 211. Brown, Cyrenius: Trepassy, Newfoundland.----...----...------------ 3285 212. Fitzgerald, William : St. John's, Newfoundland.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3286 213. Nute, Charles H. : Gloucester, Mass.----. - - - - - - - , * = º ºs ºº & tº dº e º ºs º ºs º gº tº gº ims tº 3287 214. Oakley, Joseph : Gloucester, Mass.---------------------------------- 3.287 215. McDonald, Mathew : Gloucester, Mass.--. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3288 216. Walsh, Patrick: St. John’s, Newfoundland.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3289 217. Brown, James : St. John’s, Newfoundland.--------------. ------...--. 3289 218. McKinnon, John H. : Gloucester, Mass.----------------------------- 3290 219. Curzon, John : Pictou, N. S.----...----...---- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *e a de m = m. 3291 220. Dennis, John G. : Gloucester, Mass.------------------------- - - - - --. * 3291 221. Leighton, Andrew : Gloucester, Mass.---...------------------------- 3292 222. Reeves, Robert J. : Gloucester, Mass.--------. ----...----...----. ---- 3293 223. Kirby, William H. : Gloucester, Mass.------------. ------------------ 3.293 224. Hines, Byron : Gloucester, Mass. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * º gº tº se sº E. E. gº º sº tº º & 3295 225. Greenleaf, William : Gloucester, Mass-----...-------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3295 226. Knowlton, Harvey, jr. : Gloucester, Mass. . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3296 227. Murphy, Dennis C. : Gloucester, Mass--------------...----- - - - - - - - - - - - 3297 228. Ascah, John S. : Gaspé Bay.---------------------------------------- 3297 229. Asselin, Benjamin : Gaspé.----------------------------------------- 3298 230. McCauley, Luke: Douglastown, Bay of Gaspé. - - - - - - - - - - - , ----. . . . . . 3.299 231. Howell, John: Sandy Beach, Caspé-----------------------...----.. -- 3299 232. Howell, William : Sandy Beach, Gaspé.----------------------------- 3300 233. Stewart, Charles: New Carlisle.------------------------------------ 3301 234. Poole, Christopher C.: Rockport, Mass.----------------------------- 3302 235. Terry, Russell D.: Gloucester (of Nova Scotia).----. ... --------...--- 3303 236. Herrick, William : Swan's Island, Me --- - - - - - - - - - -...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3303 237. White, Thomas H.: Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3305 238. Lee, Charles: Gloucester, Mass. . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3307 239. McPhee, Joseph : Gloucester, Mass. --- - - - - - - - - - - - -. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3308 240. Parsons, William, 2d : Gloucester, Mass. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3309 241. Pool, Solomon : Gloucester, Mass--------...-------------------------- 3309 242. Swim, Benjamin : Gloucester, Mass.-----------------------------...-- 3309 243. Carter, Charles F.: Gloucester, Mass.------------------------------- 3310 244. Thurston, Winthrop : Rockport, Mass. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .----..... . . . . . . . 3311 245. Colson, James A.: Gloucester, Mass----------------...-------------. . 3312 246. Coas, Henry G.: Gloucester, Mass-------------- - - - - - - - - -----. . . . . . . . 3312 247. Tupper, Joseph J.: Gloucester, Mass... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3313 248. Joyce, Hanson B.: Swan's Island, Me-------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3315 249. Carter, Addison : Gloucester, Mass... --- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-------. 3316 250. McLean, Joseph : now of Cape Negro, N. S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3318 251. Goodwin, A. E. : Newburyport, Mass..... ----. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 18 252. Thurlow, George D.: Newburyport, Mass.......... ----.... . . . . . . . . . . 3319 253. Cook, Benjamin F.: Gloucester, Mass.--------...----...----...------- 3319 254. Blatchford, Benjamin F.: Gloucester, Mass.....----...--------------- 3320 255. Roberts, Thomas E.: Gloucester, Mass---------------...------------- 3320 256. Wonson, J. Warren, Adams, Joseph : Gloucester, Mass......----...--- 3320 257. Martin, Charles: Gloucester, Mass ---------------------------------- 3322 258. Parsons, William, 2d : Gloucester, Mass.----. tº º sº as tº gº ºn as we tº us sº s º sº me dº º sº tº º sº tº gº 3324 259. Jacobs, Solomon : Gloucester, Mass------------------------,--------- 3324 260. Pierce, Albion K. : Gloucester, Mass.---------...--------------------. 3325 260A. Elwell, William : Gloucester, Mass.----...----------...-------------- 3326 261. Sinclair, Peter: Gloucester, Mass.---------------------------------- 3327 34.66 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Affidavits produced on behalf of the United States—Continued. 262. Rowe, William D.: Gloucester, Mass. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 263. Howard, Oliver F.: Gloucester, Mass.------------------ 4 tº gº tº $ ſº tº dº º tº sº its tº gº 264. Collins. Joseph W. : Gloucester, Mass... ----------...----...----------- 265. Glenn, John ; York, Me -------------------------------------------- 266. Hutchinson, John P.: Bridgeport, Conn -----------------...----------. 267. McIsaac, James: Port Hawkesbury, N. S.---------------------------. 268. Jameson, John S.: Gloucester, Mass. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -----. -- 269. Anderson, James L.: Gloucester, Mass-----------------------...------- 270. Lewis, Jesse : Gloucester, Mass ------------------------------------. 271. Farmer, Samuel M.: Gloucester, Mass---. --------------------------.. 272. McDonald, Alexander : Provincetown, Mass.----...- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 273. Covey, Alonzo : Swampscott, Mass---. ------------------------------ 274. Wilkins, Edward N.: Swampscott, Mass. . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 275. Staples, John S.: Swan's Island, Maine...--------...------------------ 276. McNeil, Daniel : Cape Breton, Nova Scotia- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 277. Parkhurst, Charles E.: Gloucester, Mass. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * = 278. Tarr, Zebulon : Gloucester, Mass.----------------------...----------- 279. Babson, D., C. & H. : Gloucester, Mass -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 280. Cogswell, William : Salem, Mass.-----,----. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------- A. H. Wanson, the : Judgment in the case of.------------------------------ A. J. Franklin, the : Judgment in the case of. -----...--------------------. Alexander, James W. : Affidavit 214, British case.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Anderson, James L. : Affidavit 269, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - & Answer on behalf of the United States of America to the case of Her Britan- nic Majesty’s government : Articles of the Treaty of Washington relating to the fisheries cited...... Rights possessed by American fishermen independently of the treaty - - - - Limitation of the width of the mouths of bays and gulfs, the United States insist on certain rules---------------------------------------------- Instruction to colonial authorities in 1866 with reference to inshore-fishing limitations ------------------------------------------------------- Privileges accorded to British subjects by the Treaty of Washington - - - - - Right to admit fish and fish-oil duty free into Canada of inappreciable im- portance --------------------------------------------------------- Advantages which the United States derive from the provision of Article XVIII ------------------------------------------------------------ Her Majesty’s Government are required to show the value to American fishermen of the inshore fisheries, as separated and distinguished from those of the deep sea----------------------------------------- The halibut fishery, the cod fishery, with those of allied species, solely deep sea fisheries.--------------------------------------------------- United States fishermen do not land to dry nets or cure fish. -- - - - - - - - -, - American cod-fishermen do not fish for bait to any considerable extent in British territorial waters: Compensation for allowing fishermen to buy bait and supplies, finds no foundation in this treaty. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - No benefit has as yet accrued to United States fishermen from the Treaty of Washington --------------------------------------------------- *g, * * Mackerel almost the only fish taken within the three-mile limit - - - - - - - - - Deterioration of the mackerel fisheries. ------------. -------------------- Herring fishery in British Waters--------------------------------------- Advantages derived by British subjects from the provisions of the Washing- ton Treaty: - The presence of American fishermen an advantage to Canadians - - - - - - - - - Hon. Stewart Campbell, M. P., quoted. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sir John A. Macdonald, quoted.------------, ---------------------------. Mr. Power, of Halifax, quoted.------------------------------------------ Vice-Admiral Fanshawe, quoted.--------------------------- * * = = • * * * * * * * * Commanders of Her Britannic Majesty's vessels Britomart, Plover, and 123 123 123 123 124 125 126 126 127 127 127 127 128 Ella G. McLean, quoted.---------------------------------------------- Specific benefits conferred by the treaty: Sir John A. Macdonald, quoted. The menhaden fishery - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- * is sº gº ºs º ſº tº ſº gº ºn tº sº tº gº tº * * * * gº º sº tº ſº The United States inshore fisheries for mackerel. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The enormous pecuniary value of the right to import fish and fish-oil free of duty ------------------------------------------------------------- Lord Elgin, quoted, (June 24, 1851) ---------------------------- + as ºn tº º ºs s s Mr. Stewart Campbell, quoted - - - -------------------------------------- Sir John A. Macdonald, quoted.----------------------------------------- Mr. Power, of Halifax, quoted.----------, ------------------------------ 128 129 129 130 130 130 131 131 132 ALPHABETICAL INDEX 34.67 Page. Advantages derived by British subjects from the provisions of the Washing- g ton Treaty—Continued. Dr. Tupper, of Halifax, quoted.---------------------------------------. 133 Hon. S. Campbell, of Nova Scotia, quoted.----------...----...--...--------- 134 Mr. Macdonald, of Nova Scotia, quoted...----...----...----...------------.* 134 Amount of remission of duties to Canadian fishermen under the operation of the treaty -------------------------------------------------------- 135 Value of free access to foreign markets. ...---------...------------------- 136 Recapitulation -------------------------------------------------------- 136 Appendix A: Case of the British Government----------------------...----. 77–117 B: Answer on behalf of the United States.-----...--------------. 119–137 C : Brief for the United States upon the question of the extent and limits of British North American inshore fisheries - - - - - - - - - - - - - 139–167 D: British reply to the answer of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - 169–187 E: Document filed, and read July 30, 1877, in support of the Brit- ish case---------------------------------------------------- - 189–241 F: British evidence. Testimony of 83 witnesses. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 243–1090 G. : 319 affidavits produced in support of the case of Great Britain. 1091–1455 H: Official correspondence, 1827 to 1872, showing encroachments of United States fishermen in British waters. (For list, see En- Croachments).----------------------------------------------- 1457–1508 I: Return showing quantities and values of fish exports and im- ports of Newfoundland, 1851 to 1876. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1509–1519 J. : Speeches of counsel, including the final arguments. - - - - - - - - - - 1521–1885 K: Brief on behalf of Great Britain, in reply to the United States brief-------------------------------------------------------- 1887–1906 L: Evidence on behalf of the United States---. -----...----...-. 1907–2975 M: Affidavits produced on behalf of the United States. - - - - - - - --. 2977–3348 N: Extracts from 1minutes of executive council, Newfoundland, July 7, 1871------------------------------------------------- 3349 O: Statistics produced on behalf of the United States (see Sta- tistics).----------------------- * º ºs º ºs º ºs º ºs º ºs º gº ºs º dº º ºr e º º ºs º Aº gº º sº sº º º 3351–3380 P: Judgments of British vice-admiralty courts in cases of fishing- Vessels seized.----------------------------------- ee - e. -- - - - - - - 3381–3398 Q: Testimony and affidavits in rebuttal on behalf of Great Brit- aim -----------------------------------, ---------------------- 3399–3448 R : Fishing insurance and shipping papers.--------------------- 3449–3456 Archibald, Isaac : Affidavit 115, British case ... --...-----...----. sº as ºr sº sº º sº tº sº is nº º 1234 Archibald, James: Affidavit 123, British case ---------...----...----------. 1243 Arsineaux, Sylvan F. : Affidavit 4, British case ---...-----, ----. . . . .------. 1095 Ascah, John S. : Affidavit 228, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - -...--...----. . 3.297 Ashby, Benjamin : Evidence on behalf of the United States..... -- - - - - - - - -. 2382–2390 Asselin, Benjamin : Affidavit 229, United States case---------...----...----. 3.298 Atwood, Nathaniel E. : Evidence on behalf of the United States... 1981–2028, 2047–2049 Award: $12,000,000 claimed by Great Britain on account of Canadian fishery. . 100 $1,440,000 claimed on account of Newfoundland fishery.----. ... ---. 108 Opinion of Mr. Dwight Foster on the amount of the --- - - - - - - - - - - - - 10 Dissent of Commissioner Kellogg. ----- tº º, tº º Gº tº e = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 76 Ayer, James S. : Affidavit 25, United States case. -----...----...------------- 3069 Ayer, James S. (Dennis & Ayer): Affidavit, 59, United States case. ----...-- 3124 * |B. º Babson, D. C. & H. : Affidavit 279, United States case. -- - - - - - - -...----. - - - - 3344 |Babson, Fitz J. : Evidence on behalf of the United States - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 2956–2975 Babson, Horatio: Affidavit 20, United States case. ----...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3046 Bagnall, John : Affidavit 140, British case -- .----------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1265 Baird, Prof. S. F. : Extracts from his Maine report, quoted in the British 98 CaS6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Extracts from his report on the sea-fisheries of New Eng- land in 1871 and 1872 ------------------------------- 229–231 * Extract from his report on the Maine fisheries for 1874. . 231 Evidence on behalf of the United States. - - - - - 2795–2816, 2821–2849 Bait : Privilege of purchasing in ports of the Domainion ; motion to exclude award on this behalf -------------------------------------------- 7, 40 The Commission excludes any award on that account. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7, 43, 44 Scarcity of, in United States waters asserted in British case ... -- - - - - - 99 Value, in Newfoundland, of privilege of procuring, asserted . . . . . . . --. 105 Denial that the privilege to purchase is contemplated in the treaty-- 123 Right of purchasing; motion to exclude award therefor, and debate thereon, September 5 and 6, 1877. ---------------...----...--------- 1539–1588 3468 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Page. Baker, Christopher: Affidavit 184, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1309 Baker, James: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---. 770–783 Baker, T. B. : Affidavit 107, United States case .----. * * * * * * * tº dº º & tº ſº ſº gº tº dº tº º ºs º º 3176 Baker & Ellis: Affidavit 102, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3171 Bannerman, Sir Alexander: Extract from dispatch to Earl Grey, November 15, 1851-------------------------, ---------- 1468 Dispatch to Earl Grey, February 12, 1852. ----. 1470 Return of vessels prosecuted for violation of convention of 1818, dated October 6, 1852. ... 1473 Barnes, Charles James: Affidavit 95, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1213 Barrett, John : Affidavit 105, British case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1223 Barry, James: Statements of exports of coal, salt, and lumber from Canada to the United States, 1867–1870 (British evidence) - - - - - - - - 1065–1075 Bates, John : Affidavit 101, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3170 Bay of Fundy : Light-houses in -----. ------------------------------------ 1088 Bays: Line drawn from headland to headland when less than six miles apart -------------------- ------------------------------------- 121 Bayley, R. (R. Bayley & Son): Affidavit 81, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - 3149 Bearse, George : Affidavit 24, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3065 Beaton, Joseph : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1020–102 Beazley, Richard : Affidavit 205, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 3276 Bennett, Thomas R. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - -* - - - - - - - - 502–552 Bennett, Wm. George : Affidavit 61, British case ... --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1176 Benning, Henry: Affidavit 63, British case -- - - - - - - r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1178 Berry, Thomas : Affidavit 2, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.980 Berteau, Francis: Affidavit 71, British case. ----...-----. -s tº gº tº º º sº º sº ſº * * * * > *º º 1186 Bethell, John : Affidavit 275, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1411 Bigelow, James W. : Evidence in hebalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 673–684 Bishop, George : Affidavit 165, British case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1287 Blake, Charles C. : Affidavit 121, United States case. ... ---. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3203 Blake, Levi (Jordan & Blake): Affidavit 113, United States case. ...----. ---. 3183 Blatchford, Benjamin F. : Affidavit 254, United States case .----. - - - - - - - - - - 3320 Statements taken from the books of Gloucester firms ---------------------------------------- 3364–3375 Bluntschli: On the limits of maratime jurisdiction - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * 163 Boardman, Isaac H. (T. H. Boardman & Co.): Affidavit 79, United States 314 CaS6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.146 Bolman, Robert Henry: Affidavit 319, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1456 Bonaventure, Gaspé : Address of citizens of, to Commander Campbell, Octo- ber 18, 1852.----------------------- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1474 Bonia, Maurice : Affidavit 7, in rebuttal, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - -., - - - - - - - - 3447 Bosdet, Peter: Affidavit 141, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1266 Boston : Statement of exports and imports of fish and fish-oil, 1845 to 1876 - 3354, 3355 Bouchard, Samuel: Affidavit 232, British case. --. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , 1364 Boudreau, Hyppolyte: Affidavit 225, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - tº º 1359 Boudreau, Julien : Affidavit 230, British case... - - - - sº º ºs º ºs = º sº ºn tº $ tº º º sº tº a sº is tº º º sº * 1361 Boudreau, Nathaniel : Affidavit 229, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1360 Bower, William Francis : Affidavit 224, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - & e º sº tº gº 1358 Bradley, James: Evidence on behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1907–1925 Brand, John I. : Affidavit 131, British case -------------------------------- 1252 Brett, Judge: His opinion on the limits of maritime jurisdiction quoted.--- 158 Brief on behalf of Her Majesty’s Government in reply to the brief on behalf of the United States: g I. Extent of jurisdiction seaward: Lord Stowell cited.------------------------------- mºs ºs º gº tº e º sº sº tº * * * * * 1887 Kent's Commentaries cited.---------. -------------------------. . 1887 II. Jurisdiction over bays: g Convention of 1818-------------------------------------------- * * 1887 Renunciation on part of the United States. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1888 Construction contended for on part of Great Britain. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - 1888 Construction contended for on part of United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - 1888 Views of American statesmen : Mr. Stevenson, 1841; Mr. Everett, " 1844; Mr. Webster, 1852; Mr. Rush, 1853; Senator Soulé, 1852; Senator Seward, 1852; Senator Tuck, 1852 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1888–1892 Instructions from Mr. Mitchell --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1893 Joint High Commission, views of on Convention of 1818. -- - - - - - - - - 1893 Mr. Fish to Mr. Thornton, 1871 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , , , --- - - - - - - - - - - - - 1893 III. Solution of the question : Pothier, Obligations, cited ... - - - - - - - - - - - - - sms º gº sº º ºs ºs e º sº sº as dº º sm sº as sº tº is ſº sº tº º 1894, 1897 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Brief on behalf of Her Majesty’s Government in reply to the brief on behalf of the United States—Continued. III. Solution of the question—Continued. American Admiralty Reports, cited ------------------------------- Vattel, cited -----, ---------------------------------------------- T. D. Woolsey, cited ----------------------------------------- tº is nº & Addison on Contracts, cited.-------------------------------------- Lord Ellenborough, cited ---------------------------------------- Lord Chief Justice Tindal, cited.----- - - - - - - - - - - ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Hertslet's Treaties, cited.----------------------------------------- Phillimore's International Law, cited. ------------...--------------- Bee's Admiralty Reports, case of the Africane, cited -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Revenue act of 1799 (United States), cited - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Judiciary act of 1794 (United States), cited - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Robinson's Reports, case of the Anna, cited... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IV. The words “bays,” “creeks,” and “harbors”: Mr. Justice Story, cited.----------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1897, Chief Justice Marshall, cited ------------------------------------- Pothier, Obligations, cited --------------------------------------- Lord Hale, cited.------------------------------------------------ Chief Justice Marshall, cited - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - as sº sº gº ºs tº & sº us º ºs º sº sº is sº * Attorney-General of the United States, cited - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, cited - - - - - - - - Report of committee of Congress, November, 1807, cited - - - - - - - - - - - - Instructions from Mr. Madison, cited.----------------------------- Sir Leoline Jenkins, 1665, cited.----------------------------------- AZuni, cited. ---------------------------------------------------- Puffendorf, cited ------------------------------------------------ Vattel, cited.---------------------------------, ------------------- Kent, cited.----------------------------------------------------- Case of the Queen vs. Keyn, cited-------------------------------- Lord Chief Justice of England, cited.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sir Robert Phillimore, cited.------------------------------------- Case of the Franconia, cited.------------------------------------- Case of the Direct United States Cable Company vs. The Anglo- American Telegraph Company and other respondents, cited------------------------------------------------ Judgment of Lord Blackburn, cited .----------------------------. V. Meaning of the Word “bay”--------------------------------------- Conclusion------------------------------------------------------ Brief on behalf of the United States upon the question of the extent and limits of the inshore fisheries and territorial waters on the Atlantic coast of British North America: Articles relating to the fisheries in the treaty cited - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. Treaty of Paris (February 10, 1763) cited - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Treaty of Ghent, December 24, 1814, referred to. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Convention of October 20, 1818, cited - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Construction put on article 1 by the government of the Dominion, and view of the American Government -------------------------------- - Correspondence in September, 1824, Mr. Brent to Mr. Addington.----. & Correspondence between Mr. Addington and Mr. Adams cited- - - - - - - - - - Correspondence between Mr. Bankhead and Mr. Forsyth, in 1836, re- ferred to ---------------------------------------------------------- Circular issued by the Secretary of the Treasury to American fishermen in 1836.----------------------------------------------------------- Letter from Lieutenant-Commander Paine to Mr. Forsyth, December 29, 1839, cited - --------------------------------------------------- Correspondence between Mr. Forsyth and Mr. Stevenson, in February, 1841, cited -------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Stevenson to Lord Palmerston.------------------------------, ---- Seizure of the American schooner Washington, May 10, 1843, special message of President Tyler ---------------------------------------- Correspondence between Mr. Everett and Lord Aberdeen.-- - - - - - - - - - - - Seizure of American schooner Argus, August, 1844---------. ----------- Mr. Everett to Mr. Calhoun, March 25, 1845 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. Mr. Everett to Mr. Buchanan, April 23, 1845. -------------------------. Mr. Crampton's notice to Mr. Webster, July 5, 1852. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Notice issued by the Provincial Secretary of Canada, August 23, 1852. Convention of February 8, 1853. ------------------------------------ Tº 1898 1899 1899 1899 1899 1900 1900 1900 1900, 1901 1910 142 143 143 143 143 144 3470 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Page Brief on behalf of the United States upon the question of the extent and limits of the inshore fisheries and territorial waters on the Atlantic coast of British North America—Continued. Decision of Mr. Joshua Bates in the case of the schooner Washington, .. 152 The intention of the framers of the Convention of 1818. - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 153 Effect of the conclusion of the Reciprocity Treat. -- - - - - - - - - - * * * = &º g º sº 153y Instructions for the guidance of naval officers on the coast of the North American Provinces----------------------------------------------- 153 Licensing system instituted by the Canadian Government, 1866 - - - - - - - - 154 Correspondence between Mr. Fish and Mr. Thornton, resulting from the decision of the Canadian Government to issue no licenses to foreign fishermen in 1870. ------------------------------------------------- 154 Mr. Rogers to the Secretary of the Admiralty, April 30, 1870 - - - - - - - - - - - 155 Instructions issued by Mr. Peter Mitchell, Minister of Marine and Fish- eries-------------------------------------------------------------- 155 Lord Granville's telegram to the Governor-General.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 155 Memorandum from the Foreign Office cited - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 156 “What are bays of Her Majesty’s dominions,” authorities cited - - - - - - - - 156 Case of the Franconia, November, 1876. ...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 156 Sir Robert Phillimore quoted ---------------------. ------...----------- 156 Lindley, J., quoted -------------------------------------------------- 157 Grove, J., quoted ---------------------------------------------------- 157 Brett, J., quoted.----------------------------------------------------- 158 Lord Chief Justice Cockburn quoted - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 159–162 Lxtracts from writers on International Law : Wattel, Law of Nations - - - - - - - - - - - .* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * = 162 Professor Bluntschli, Law of Nations - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 163 Klüber, Droit des Gens Modernes de l’Europe - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 163 Ortolan, Diplomatie de la Mer-------------------------. ------------ 163 Hautefeuille, Droit et Devoirs des Nations Neutres ...----. -- - - - - - - - - - 164 Amos, his edition of Manning's Law of Nations - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 164 Marten’s Précis du Droit des Gens Modernes de l’Europe - - - - - - - - - - - - - 165 T]e Cussy, Phases et Causes Célèbres-------------------------------- 166 Conclusion as to the rights of the fishermen of the United States; mani- fest duty of the Commissioners ------------------------------------ 166 Brier, Charles H. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2456–2458 Briord, Peter: Affidavit 236, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1369 British Subjects: Their advantages in the United States waters considered in - the British case------------------------------------------------------- 97 Brochu, Pierre : Affidavit 238, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1371 Brown, Cyrenius: Affidavit 211, United States case ---. - . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3285 Brown, H. A. & Co.: Affidavit 140, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3213 Brown, James: Affidavit 217, United States case- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3289 Brown, Joseph F. : Evidence on behalf of the United States... -- - - - - - - - - - - 2390–2401 Brown, William : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. ----...- - - - - - - - - - - - - 668–673 Browne, Daniel M.: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1086–1090 Bulwer, Mr. : His note to Mr. Webster of June 24, 1851, on the Reciprocity Treaty--------------------------------------------------------------- 178 Bunker, George : Affidavit 177, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3250 Bunn, Edward : Affidavit 196, British case.----------...------------------. 1323 Burgess, Isaac : Evidence on behalf of the United States. . . . . . . . . .:- - - - - - - - 2453–2456 Burrill, E. (E. Burrill & Co.): Affidavit 78, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - 3145 Busben, James: Affidavit 263, British case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 1397 Butler, George: Affidavit 103, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1221 C. Cameron, Hugh : Affidavit 147, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3220 Campbell, Colin Y., commander of the Devastation: Dispatch to Sir A. Ban- merman, September 16, 1852- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * 1472 Report on encroachments of United States fishermen, November 10, 1852.---------------------------------------------------- 1476 Campbell, Donald : Affidavit 260, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1396 Campbell, Joseph : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. ----...-- - - - - - - - - - - 331–343 recalled: Additional evidence.----------...--------. ---- 370-374 Affidavit 15, British case------------------------------- 1113 Campbell, Mr. Stewart, M. P. : His views respecting reciprocity quoted in the United States case .-------------------------------------- 127 ALPHIABETICAL INDEX. 34.71 Campion, Alexander: Affidavit 204, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Campion, John F. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain . ----. - - - - - - - - -. tº ºs Canada: Steady decline of American inshore fishery in the waters of the Dominion of ------------------------------------------------- Inshore fisheries—headlands and bays-----------...--------------- Extent and value of sea-fisheries.------------------------------- Advantages derived by American citizens from the sea-fisheries of: 1. Liberty of fishing in British Waters. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2. Liberty to land for purposes of drying nets, curing fish, &c. 3. Transshipping cargoes and obtaining supplies, &c.- - - - - - - - - - - 4. Formation of fishing establishments.--------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5. Convenience of reciprocal free market.----...-- *e me sº sº tº nº gº tº me tº ºs º 6. Participation in improvement resulting from fishery protection service of Canada.------------------------------------------ Advantages derived by British subjects in, under the fishery con- Vention ------------------------------------------------------ Amount of award claimed by Great Britain in respect of.-----...--- Tables of fishery products of the Dominion from 1869 to 1875- . . . . Tables of fishery products reported from the Dominion, from 1868 to 1874 ------------------------------------------------------ Table of countries whither exported ---------------------. ------ Advantages to, of a free market for fish in the United States - - - - - Dominion of, statement of fishing licenses issued to American fish- ing vessels in 1866 ------------------------------------------- Statement of licenses, &c., 1867.-------------------------------- 1868 --------------------------------- Canning, W. P. : Commanding His Majesty's Ship Alligator. Letter to Ad- miral Ogle, November 9, 1827 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Carey, James: Affidavit 280, British case ------------------------- - - - - - - - - Carew, Thomas: Affidavit 94, British case.----------. -------------------- Carrigan, Christopher: Affidavit 189, United States case. -----...----...----- Carrigan, Rufus : Affidavit; 195, United States case. ----. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Carson, Robert : Affidavit 312, British case ---------------...-------------- Carter, Addison: Affidavit 249, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Carter, Charles F. : Affidavit 243, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Carter, John : Affidavit 244, British case. --------------------------------- Case of Her Majesty's Government: Introduction: Negotiations in 1783, Treaty of Paris - - - - -, -------------------------- Negotiations at Ghent, 1814------------------------------------------ Convention of 1818, Article I cited ----------------------------------- Negotiations for reciprocity, 1847; signature of treaty, 1854 - - - - - - - - - - - Revival of convention of 1818 --------------------------------------- Licensing system adopted in 1866 and abandoned in 1870 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Joint High Commission in 1871 -------------------------------------- Fishery articles of the Treaty of Washington -----------..... ---------- Acts passed to enable the fishery articles of the Treaty of Washington to be carried into effect.------------------------------------------- IPrivileges conferred on the United States citizens by the Treaty of Washington, in addition to those conferred by the convention of 1818. Part I.-Canada: I. Extent and value of Canadian fisheries...----. -------------------- II. Advantages derived by United States citizens: liberty of fishing in British Waters----------------------- -------------------------- Number of United States fishing vessels frequenting British waters. American mackerel-fishing in British waters.--------------------- Estimates of the annual catch of Americans in British waters -- - - - - American capital embarked-------------------------------------- Deteriorated condition of United States fisheries. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Liberty to land for the purpose of drying nets, curing fish, &c ---- Transshipping of cargoes, and obtaining supplies, &c. - - - - - - †: º ºs º º ſº Formation of fishing establishments.---- e se as sº me as as a sm us me is ºn se tº s sº se tº º me as me tº º Convenience of reciprocal free market.----...----...---- gº ºn as ºn tº sº me s sº sº Participation in improvements resulting from the fisheries protec- tion service in Canada. ---------------------------------------- III. Advantages derived by British subjects: liberty of fishing in United States waters and other privileges connected therewith.... ------ Professor Baird's report.----------------------------------------- Extent of concession embodied in the Reciprocity Treaty. --------- Page. 1333 304–331 S 169–171 87 97–100 100 109–112 113 114–116 131 197-205 206–212 213–217 1457 1414 1212 3260 3265 1448 3.316 3310 1379 78 79 34.72 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Page Case of Her Majesty's Government—Continued. Part I.-Canada—Continued. The question of bait.-------------------------------------------- 98 The menhaden industry in the United States ... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 99 Customs remission by United States in favor of Canada........ --. 100 Conclusion: Amount of compensation claimed in respect of the Do- minion of Canada --------------------------------------------- 100 Part II.—Newfoundland : - I. Introduction and description of Newfoundland fisheries. ... - - - - - .. 100 Value of the Newfoundland fisheries -------...--------. ----------. 101 Importance of bait ---------------------------------------------- 102 II. Advantages derived by United States citizens: the entire freedom of the inshore fisheries ------------------------------------ '• * * * 103 Value of the concession to procure bait and supplies, transship, &c. 105 The advantage of a free market for fish and fish-oil in Newfound- land: benefits conferred on United States fishermen by the market opened to them for the sale of small fish, hitherto thrown away.. 106 III. Advantages derived by British subjects: valueless character of the concession to fish in United States coastal waters north of the 39th parallel ------------------------------------------------------- 97, 106 Remission of the duty on fish and fish-oil a reciprocal privilege ... 107 Conclusion.—Amount of compensation claimed in respect of the colony of Newfoundland.----------------------, -------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 108 Summary.—Total amount of compensation claimed by Her Majesty's Government on behalf of Canada and Newfoundland, collectively.... 108 Annex A.—Aggregate quantities and values of the produce of Canadian fisheries, in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, and Prince Edward Island ------------------------------------------------------------ 109–112 Annex B.-Quantities and values of articles exported from ports be- tween Rameau Islands to Cape Race, and thence north to Twillingate, inclusive, 1868 to 1874-------------------------------- dº sº º ºs ºn tº sº tº ºn tº tº sº s 113 Annex C.—Census returns, not reprinted.--------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * ſº º Annex D.—Quantities and values of articles exported from ports in Newfoundland, from Rameau Islands east to Cape Race, thence north to Tilt Cove, 1868 to 1874.-----------...----------------------------. 114–116 Cashin, Richard: Affidavit 79, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1193 Central Wharf Company, of Provincetown, Mass.: Affidavit 84, United States 315.2 C&S6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - fº Central Wharf Company, of Wellfleet, Mass.: Affidavit 94, United States case- 3.162 Champion, Benjamin : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1023–1025 Champion, John : Affidavit 10, British case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1105 Champion, William : Affidavit 12, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1108 Charlotte Town, Royal Gazette of: Extract from, June 26, 1838. ----, ------ 1463 vice-admiralty court of: Return of American vessels pros- ecuted for violation of Convention of 1818; dated Octo- ber 6, 1852.------------------------------------------- 1473 Chase, E. H. : Affidavit 120, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.191 Chase, M. M. (Chase & Cushing): Affidavit 122, United States case. - - - - - - - 31.93 Chase, Stephen B. : Affidavit 11, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - & ºn 3012 Chase, W. H. (Thomas, Chase & Co.) : Affidavit 119, United States case.--. 3190 Cheney, S. F. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1945–1959 Chivarie, Capt. Simon : Evidence in behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 243–281 Chiverie, Alex. : Affidavit 16, British case. ----------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1114 Chouinard, Isaac : Affidavit 239, British case. --...----------...-- - - - - - - - - - - - 1373 Christian, William B. : Affidavit 271, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1406 Churchill, Howard M.: Evidence on behalf of the United States.----...---- 2849–2854 Clark, George O. : Evidence on behalf of the United States.... -- - - - - - - - -. 2469–2471 Clark, George, jr. (Clark & Somes): Affidavit 74, United States case ------- 3140 Coas, Henry G. : Affidavit 246, United States case- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3312 . Cobb, Henry A. : Affidavit 210, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3284 Cochrane, Commander, of Her Majesty's ship Sappho : Extract from dispatch of, to Vice-Admiral Seymour, October 3, 1851. - - - - - 1466 Extract from report to Vice-Admiral Fanshawe, June 18, 1870----------------------------------------- 1494 Cockburn, Chief Justice, opinion of, on question of headlands, bays, and marine limits ----- --------------------------------------------------- 159 Cod fishery: Exclusively carried on in the open sea.... ... -- - - - - - - - - - • * * * * * * 123 Of Newfoundland.------------------------------------------ 183–185 Coggins, Livingston : Affidavit 269, British case........................... 1405 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. 3473 Page. Cogswell, William : Affidavit 280, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 3345 Cohoon, Solomon : Affidavit 173, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3246 Collas, Adolphus E. : Affidavit 173, British case...----...----...------------ 1296 Collins, Joseph W.; Affidavit 264, United States case ...... --- - - - - - - - - - - tº a 3330 Collins, William : Affidavit 68, British case. ---...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11.83 Colson, James A. : Affidavit 245, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3312 Commercial advantages to the United States not within the scope of the treaty : Motion of the United States counsel and Agent asking the Commission to rule their exclu- Sion ------ s s ºr * * ~ * re m = me s is a sm • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 7, 40 The motion of the United States granted by the Commission unanimously ---------------------- 7,43, 44 Commercial Wharf Company of Wellfleet, Mass.: Affidavit 95, United States 3164 - CàSe - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Condon, Thomas : Affidavit 248, British case -------...--------. ------------ 1382 Conley, John : Affidavit 9, United States case. --- - - - - - - - - -: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3006 Conley, John, jr. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2721–2729 Conrad, George: Affidavit 86, British case ------. ------------------------- 1203 Conroy, James: Affidavit 6, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1099 Conway, Edward A. : Affidavit 221, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1355 Conwell, David : Affidavit 93, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3161 Cook, Benjamin F. : Affidavit 253, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3319 Evidence on behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - - 2252–2262 Cook, E. P. (E. P. & E. K. Cook: Affidavit 89, United States case- - - - - - - - - - 3157 Cook, Geoffrey: Affidavit 87, British case--------------------------------- 1204 Cook, Henry : Evidence on behalf of the United States ........ -- - - - - - - - - - 2066–2074 Cook, H. & S. & Co.: Affidavit 85, United States case - ...----. --- - - - - - - - - - - - 3153 Cook, Thomas C. : Affidavit 198, British case------------------------------ 1326 Affidavit 174, United States case - ...----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3247 Cook, William O. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. --- - - - - - - - - - - - 2711–2714 Cormier, Francis : Affidavit 226, British case- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1359 Cormier, Gabriel: Affidavit 220, British case...----------...------...----, --- 1354 Affidavit 228, British case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - sº sº sº º ºs ºn tº º 1360 Coughlan, Charles: Affidavits of, concerning encroachments of United States fishermen, January 24, 1838.------------------------------------------- 1462, 1463 Counsel for Great Britain before the Commission : Nomination of Messrs. Doutre, Thomson, Whiteway, Davies, and Weatherbe... - - - - - - - - - 14 for the United States before the Commission: Nomination of Messrs. Trescot and Dana --------------------------------------------- 15 speeches of (see Dana, Doutre, Foster, Thomson, Trescot, Weath- erbe, and WhiteWay).----------------------------------------- Cousins, James W. : Affidavit 317, British case. . . . . . ... ------...----...----.. 1453 Couture, Baptiste: Affidavit 126, British case. -------. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1246 Couture, Joseph : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -... 791, 792 Covey, Alonzo : Affidavit 273, United States case. --...- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3341 Crane, L. G. : Affidavit 4, United States case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2987 Creed, Charles: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --. 927–937 Crichton, William : Affidavit 147, British case ...... --...----...----.. ** * * * * 172 Crispo, Michael : Affidavit 47, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --...----...----. 1161 Affidavit 164, United States case. ----------------------- 32.38 Critchet, George : Affidavit 188, United States case.--...---...----...--- º ºn 3258 Crittenden, E. Aug. : Affidavit 155, United States case. ---...----...----... 3230 Crittenden, Isaiah : Affidavit 154, United States case.----...----...-...----. 3228 Crocker & Atwood : Affidavit 88, United States case .----...----. tº sº sº as e º º sº as gº 3156 Crowell, Eleazer : Affidavit 289, British case. - - - - tº tº me as as ºn tº s m = m - us tº ºn tº º ºs º gº ºn an º ºs º 1421 Crowell, Elisha : Affidavit 18, United States case ---...-------...----...----. 3039 Cunningham, John C. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain..... ----...--- 1025–1036 Cunningham, Sylvester (Cunningham & Thompson): Affidavit 58, United States case.----------------------------------------------- 3122 Currie, D. : Report on the island-caught fish of Prince Edward Island, 1850– - 1878 ------------------------------------------------------- 233—237 Carrie, James: Evidence on behalf of the United States .......----...-----, 2482–2493 Carrie, Robert': Affidavit 277, British case. -------...----...----...----..... 1412 Currier, Charles O. : Affidavit 82, United States case.----...----...----..... 3150 Curzon, John : Affidavit 219, United States case. -----. . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3291 Cushing, Emory (Chase & Cushing): Affidavit 122, United States case .... 31.93 Cº., R. M.: Affidavit of, presented to assembly of Nova Scotia March 23, * ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1461 Cutts, R. D. : Report to Mr. Seward on the fisheries, January 7, 1869 (ex- tracts from).----...----. , , º ºs º º 4 ſe gº ºn tº tº ºn tº sº ºn sº sº we s m as ºr * * * * * * ºf a wa is a sº w is sº or sº es s as ºn s = e a 219 218 F 3474 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. HD. Page. Dalhousie, Earl of: Extract from his dispatch to Lord Bathurst, June 8, 1827. 1457 Dana, Richard H. : Motion in behalf of the United States respecting the right of final reply, and the debate thereon, August 28, 1877 -------------------------------------------- 1521—1538 Arguments in favor of the right of final reply. - - - - - - - - - 1526—1532 Arguments against awards for right of purchasing bait and transshipment, September 5 and 6, 1877- - - - - - - - - 1570, 1580 Closing argument on behalf of the United States, No- - Vember 9 and 10, 1877. ------------------------------ 1652–1705 Daniels, Timothy A. : Evidence on behalf of the United States ... --....... 21.31—2132 Davidson, James H. : Affidavit 14, British case---...----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1111 Davidson, Sebastian : Affidavit 11, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 1107 Davis, William : Evidence on behalf of the United States.... -- - - - - - - - . . . . 2710 Deagle, Peter: Affidavit 26, British case---------------. -----------------. 1125 Deagle, Robert : Affidavit 279, British case.----...----...------------------- 1413 Le Cussy on the limits of maritime jurisdiction - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 166 Delfosse, Mr., chosen to preside over the labors of the Commission - - - - - - - - - 12 Deneff, Joseph P. : Affidavit 52, British case.-----------...---. .----------- 1166 Dennis (George Dennis & Co.) : Affidavit 52, United States case - - - - - - - - - - 31.16 Dennis, John G. : Affidavit 220, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3291 (Dennis & Ayre): Affidavit 59, United States case - - - - - - - 3124 Denton, Charles W. : Affidavit 292, British case.----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -...----- 1423 Denton, Joseph E. : Affidavit 293, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1424 Derby, E. H. : Report to Mr. Seward on the fisheries, January, 1867 (ex- tracts from).---------------------------------------------------------- 189 Devot, Daniel : Affidavit 216, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1348 Dickey, William A. : Evidence on behalf of the United States - - - - - - - - - - - - 3411, 2418 TJiggdon, Philip : Affidavit 155, British case -------------...--------------- 1276 Dillon, John : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 937, 942 Doane, Valentine: Affidavit 106, United. States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3175 Doane, V., jr., & Co : Affidavit 108, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3177 Dobson, Joseph : Affidavit 116, British case.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------.. 1235 Documents filed in support of British case, list of. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 117, 189 Doutre, Joseph : Arguments against the right of final reply ...-- - - - - - - - 1533, 1536, 1537 Argument in favor of awards for right of purchasing bait and transshipment, September 5 and 6, 1877. -- - - - - - - -... 1557 Final argument on behalf of Great Britain, November 16 and 17, 1877--------------------. ---------------------- 1724–1776 Doviant, Dominick: Affidavit 311, British case.--------------------------. 1447 Doyle, Charles: Affidavit 184, United States case .----...----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3255 Doyle, Placide : Affidavit 227, British case -------------------------------- 1359 IDumaresq, George : Affidavit 203, British case ---...----...--...----...----... 1332 Dunn, Charles W. : Affidavit 30, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -----. 1130 Duties on fish and fish-oil in the United States: Advantages to the Domin- ion by reason of their re- mission -----. ----------- 9, 122 Opinions of prominent Can- adian statesmen as to the value of such remission... - 131-135 TXyer, Charles A. : Affidavit 115, United States case ---...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.185 Dyer, E. M. (Union Wharf Company): Affidavit 83, United States case .... 3151 E. Eakins, Robert S., jr. : Affidavit 301, British case.--...--------------------. 1431 Eaton, William : Affidavit 3, United States case .----. ems sº gº ºs e º ºs º ºs ºº e º sº tº º sº sº tº ſº tº 2984 |Eisenhauer, James: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 827–838 Eldridge, Levi: Affidavit 103, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3172 Elwell, William : Affidavit 260 A, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3326 Embree, Chandler: Affidavit 172, United States case.----. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3245 Embree, William : Affidavit 167, United States case. --...----...----...----. - 3240 Encroachments (alleged) of United States fishermen in British North American waters since the conclusion of the convention of 1818. Docu- ments and correspondence filed in behalf of Great Britain : 1. Earl Dalhousie to Earl Bathurst, Quebec, June 9, 1827 (extract)...... 1457 2. Captain Canning, of Her Majesty's ship Alligator, to Rear-Admiral Ogle, Halifax, November 9, 1827. -----------------. --------------- 1457 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Encroachments (alleged) of United States fishermen in British North American waters since the conclusion of the convention of 1818. Docu- ments and correspondence filed in behalf of Great Britain—Continued. 3. Address to the King from the council and assembly of Nova Scotia, February 24, 1836.----------------------------------------------- 4. Address to the Queen from the council and assembly of Nova Scotia, March 22, 1838 ---------------- ------------- as we tº sº, º gº as as tº gº tº as º ºs º ºs tº gº ºn tº 5. Proceedings of the assembly of Nova Scotia; affidavit of R. M. Cutler, March 23, 1838 -------------------------------------------------- 6. Lieutenant-Governor Harvey to Major-General Sir Colin Campbell, Fredericton, January 27, 1838, with two inclosures.... -- - - - - - - - - - - (1). Affidavit of Duncan Hay and Charles Coughlan ..... ---- tº es sº tº sº ºne wº (2). Second affidavit of the same. -------------------------, -------- 7. Extract from the Royal Gazette, Charlottetown, June 26, 1838. -----. S. Lieutenant-Governor Harvey to Lord Glenelg, Fredericton, March 19, 1839, containing a report of the assembly of New Brunswick, March 18, 1839. -------------------------------------------------------- 9. Petition to the Queen, from the council and assembly of Prince Ed- Ward Island, March 24, 1843. ----------------------------------- º 10. Commander Cochrane, of the Sappho, to Vice-Admiral Seymour, Hali- fax, October 3, 1851 (extract) ------------------------------------ 11. Sir A. Bannerman to Earl Gray, Prince Edward Island, November 15, 1851 (extract) --------------------------------------------------- 12. Address to the Queen, from the council and assembly of Prince Ed- Ward Island, February 9, 1852-------------------------. ---------- 13. Sir A. Bannerman to Earl Grey, February 12, 1852 -----. -- - - - - - - - - - - 14. William H. McKay to the Hon. J. Warburton, Princetown, July 2, 1852 --------------------------- tº ºs º ºs º ºs º ºs s º º sº me es e º sº, sº e º º sº im, as º is sº tº ſº tº º sº tº 15. Court of vice-admiralty at Halifax; return of American vessels seized for violation of the convention of 1818, dated July 30, 1852. - - - - - - - 16. Commander Campbell, of the Devastation, to Sir A. Bannerman, Char- lottetown, September 16, 1852, - - - - , sº º ºs gº dº nº sº sº gº tº as as sº sº ºn s = * > * * * * * * * * * * * * 17. Court of vice-admiralty, Charlottetown; return of American vessels prosecuted for violation of convention of 1818, dated October 6, - 1859 ------------------------------------------------------------ 18. Vice-Admiral Seymour to the secretary of the admiralty, Halifax, October 30, 1852- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------ gº ºn tº sº sº dº e s sº sº tº º ºs º ºs dº º ºs ºn as as º is sº sº sº sº º 19. Address of citizens of Bonaventure, Gaspé, to Commander Campbell, October 18, 1852------------------------------------------------- 20. Vice-Admiral Seymour to the secretary of the admiralty, Bermuda, November 18, 1852, with two inclosures - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 31. 32 33. (1). Report of Commander Campbell, of Her Majesty’s ship Devasta- tion, Halifax, November 10, 1852. - - - - - - - - - - * > * is s is sºme ºf s is an ºn as as sº ºf tº sº as ºf s we sº tº (2). Abstract of the state of papers of British vessels at Port Hood.. Vice-admiralty court of New Brunswick; list of vessels prosecuted for infraction of convention of 1818, St. John, October 11, 1852 ---. Address to the Queen from the council and assembly of New Brunswick, November 1, 1852. - - - - - - - ---------------------------------------- Address to the Queen from the assembly of Nova Scotia, February 17, 1853 ----------------------------------------------------- ------- º to the Queen from the representatives of Nova Scotia, March 30, 1853----------------------------. -------------- ---------------- Address to the Queen from the council of Nova Scotia, April 4, 1853-- Address to the Queen from citizens of St. John, New Brunswick, January, 1853 ------------------------------------------ * º ºs e º gº tº º ºs Memorial to the Queen from citizens of Northumberland County, New Brunswick, January 5, 1853 -------------------------------------- B. H. Norton, United States Consul at Pictou, to Sir A. Bannerman, October 28, 1852 --------------------------, ---------------------- St. Johns' Chamber of Commerce to Hon. James Crowdy on the sub- ject of reciprocity, June 25, 1853.--------------------------------- . Address to the Queen from the commons of Newfoundland, April 23, 1853------------------------------, ------------------------ - - - - - - Memorandum, vice-admiralty court, Prince Edward Island, relative to Seizure of certain United States fishing vessels -------------------- Extract from speech of Hon. Joseph Howe, from the Spectator, July 19, 1865 - - - - - - - - ------------------------------------------------- Vice-Admirai Wellesley to the secretary of the admiralty, Bermuda, November 18, 1869 ----, ------------------- • * * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - a • - 1460 1461 1462 1462 1463 1463 1464 1465 1466 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1472. 1473 1474 1474 1475 1476 1481 1481 1481 1483 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1489 1490 1492 3476 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Page. Encroachments (alleged) of United States fishermen in British North g American waters since the conclusion of the convention of 1818. Docu- ments and correspondence filed in behalf of Great Britain—Continued. 34. Report from Commander Cochrane to Vice-Admiral Fanshawe, June 18, 1870 (extract) --------------------------------------------------- 1494 35. Judge Jackson, United States Consul at Halifax, to Vice-Admiral Wellesley, August 30, 1870 --------------------------------------- 1494 36. Vice-Admiral Wellesley to United States Consul Jackson, Halifax, August 31, 1870-------------------------------------------------- 1494 37. United States Consul Jackson to Vice-Admiral Wellesley, Halifax, Sep- tember 1, 1870--------------------------------------------------- 1494 38. Vice-Admiral Wellesley to United States Consul Jackson, Halifax, Sep- tember 3, 1870. Duties enjoined on the commanders of Her Majesty's * ships------------------------------------------------------------ 1495 39. Report from Captain Hardinge, of the Valorous, to Vice-Admiral Wellesley, Halifax, September 17, 1870. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1496 40. Captain Phillamore to Vice-Admiral Fanshawe, Halifax, November 15, 1870 (extract) --------------------------------------------------- 1497 41. Commander Knowles, of the Lapwing, to Vice-Admiral Fanshawe, November 7, 1870------------------------------------------------ 1498 42. Revised schedule of vessels seized during 1870 for violations of fishery and revenue laws. Ottawa, December 14, 1870 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1500 43. List of fishing vessels boarded by Her Majesty’s ship Plover between July 25 and August 21, 1870-------------------------------------- 1501 44. List of foreign vessels boarded within three miles of land on the coast of Prince Edward Island during the fishing season of 1872- - - - - - - - - 1504 45. List of United States fishing vessels in the waters of Prince Edward Island distinguished, but not boarded, by Her Majesty’s ships in 1872. 1508 England, Thomas : Affidavit 194, United States case. ...--------...----...---... 3264 England, William : Affidavit 190, United States case ... -- - - - - - - - - - - -...----. 3261 Evans, John ; Affidavit 55, British case------------------------, ---------- 1169 Lverett, Edward : Correspondence with Lord Aberdeen in 1843–44 on the inshore fisheries------------------------------------------------------. 145–149 Evidence. (See witnesses, affidavits, &c. Evitt, John S. : Evidence on behalf of the United States.----...- ... . . . . . . . 2241–2252 | F. Falt, Walter M. : Affidavit 26, United States case. ... --...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3073 Evidence on behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 2871–2879 (Leighton & Co.): Affidavit 71, United States case. --...-- 3137 Farmer, Samuel M. : Affidavit 271, United States case. ... ---...-- - - - - - - - - - - - 3339 Fauvel, John B. : Affidavit 171, British case.----------...---------------- * 1294 Ferguson, John : Affidavit 119, British case. ------------------------------ 1238 Ferguson, Peter: Affidavit 183, British case------------------------------. 1308 Fernald, D. L. (J. W. Sawyer & Co.): Affidavit 118, United States case.... 31.89 Ferris, Simon : Affidavit 146, British case. ---------------...--------------- 1270 Fiander, Samuel: Affidavit 164, British case ------------------------------ 1286 Fiander, Stephen : Affidavit 4, in rebuttal, British case. -- - - - - - - - - sº tº gº ºn gº tº as as tº 3446 Fish, Mr. : Correspondence with Sir E. Thornton in 1870 relative to Cana- - dian fishing licenses--------------------------------------------- .* * * * * * 154, 155 Fisher, Wilford J. : Evidence on behalf of the United States... ---. .... ---. 2506–25.27 Eisheries, inshore: Of Canada; question of the extent of. The Everett- Aberdeen correspondence, 1843–44. . .---- * * * * * * * ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 139 Fishery Commission, the Organization of.------------------------------- 12 Rules of procedure adopted.--------------------- 13 Modification of procedure ---------------------- 35, 36 Fitch, James: Affidavit 138, United States case-...----...----...------------- 3211 Fitzgerald, William : Affidavit 212, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3286 Flynn, Edmund: Affidavit 201, British case------------------------------- 1329 Flynn, James: Affidavit 200, British case --------------------------------- 1328 Flynn, Wm. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 787–791 Foley, Michael : Affidavit 24, British case. -------------------------------- 1123 Ford, Mr. Francis Clare : Admitted as British agent before the Commission. 12 Fortin, Pierre: Extract from report of, for 1865- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 218 Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 882–901 Fortune, Lawrence: Affidavit 93, British case. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1210 Foster, Mr. Dwight: Agent of the United States. Letter to Mr. Evarts reporting award.----. ... --- & e º ºr se sº ºr e º sm is as s = a is as a sm as --- 6 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. 3477 Page. Foster, Mr. Dwight: Admitted as agent of the United States before the Com- mission------------------------------------------- 12 His answer in behalf of the United States. - - - - - - - -., -. 119–13 Remarks on the right of final reply, August 28, 1877 - . 1522, 1532 Motion to exclude purchase of bait and transshipment of cargoes as bases of awards, and the debate thereon, September 5 and 6, 1877--------------------------- 1539–1588 Closing argument on behalf of the United States, No- vember 5 and 6, 1877 ------------------------------ 1588–1629 Foster, James P. : Affidavit 297, British case.-----------...----. ---- - - - - - - - - - 1427 Fournier, Charles : Affidavit 190, British case. ---------...----------------- 1316 Fournier, Messie : Affidavit 242, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1377 Fox, John J.: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain ---------...----. ---------- 462–488 Fox, Thomas Edward: Affidavit 149, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3223 Fraser, James: Affidavit 118, British case -------------------------------- 1237 Fraser, James O. : Affidavit 274, and statement of cost of maintaining New- foundland light-houses, British case ---------------------------- 1410 Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 57.5–596 Freeman, Francis M. : Evidence on behalf of the United States.-- - - - - - - - - - 2049–2066 Affidavit 86, United States case.----. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3154 Freeman, Jesse H., (agent Mercantile Wharf Company of Wellfleet): Affi- davit 96, United States case---------------------------------- 31.65 Freeman, Nathan D. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - , 2033—2087 (Freeman & Hilliard): Affidavit 87, United States case-- 3155 Frehil, William : Affidavit 154, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1276 French, Eliphalet W. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - 2696–2710 Friend, Frank W., and Sidney, (Sidney Friend & Bro.): Affidavit 21, United States case ---------- * * * * * * * *m as sº sº gº tº as sº sº ºn tº sº sº m º ºs ºs º º ºs º º º sº tº º tº ºs º ºs º ºs º ºn G. 3051 Friend, George : Evidence on behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2133—2148 (George Friend & Co.): Affidavit 28, United States case -- 3081 Friend, Joseph : Affidavit 55, United States case.----. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3119 Friend, Sidney, (Sidney Friend & Co.): Affidavit 69, United States case--- 3135 Frye, James: Affidavit 110, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3179 Fundy, Bay of: Question of maritime jurisdiction in, Historical review of... 143–151 * G. Gale, John H. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. - - - - - - ... - $º º ſº as ºn as sº sº º 2231–2241 Gallant, Meddie : Affidavit 8, British case -------------------------------- 1102–1104 Galt, Sir Alexander T. : Decision on question of excluding awards for right to purchase bait and transship, September 6, 1877.--------...------------ 1585–1588 Gardiner, John P. : Affidavit 264, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1398 Gardner, Enos : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 912–914 Gardner, Pardon : Affidavit 150, British case. ----...----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1273 Gardner, Sidney: Evidence on behalf of the United States -----...----. - - - - 2312–2316 Gardner, William Edw. : Affidavit 128, British case -------.--------------- 1243 Gaudet, Agno J. : Affidavit 22, British case ------------------------------- 1121 Gaul, Charles: Affidavit 206, British case.-------------------------------- 1336 Gavey, Abraham : Affidavit 182, British case. ----------------...----------. 1307 Gerring, Frederick: Affidavit 29, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3085 Getson, Daniel: Affidavit 88, British case ------------------------...-------- 1206 Getson, James: Affidavit 137, British case.----------------...-------------- 1262 Gillies, Alexander: Affidavit 265, British case. ---------------------------- 1398 Gillies, Angus: Affidavit 273, British case -------------------...----------- I 409 Gillis, James: Affidavit 166, United States case.-------------------------- 3239 Gilman, Alphonso: Affidavit 35, British case-----...----...----------------- 1139 Giovanninui, Henry : Affidavit 59, British case. ----. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1175 Girrois, James L. : Affidavit 179, United States case. - - - - - - - - - -. sº º sº sº, sº º º sº as sº tº gº 3252 Glazebrook, John : Affidavit 206, United States case.-- - - - - - - - - - gº tº g º ºs as ºs º ºs º ºs 3278 Glenn, John : Affidavit 265, United States case. ----...--------------------- 3332 Gloucester, Mass.: Cod and mackerel fleet of.--------------...- ... -------- 89 Statistics of population and valuation of - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2592–2594 Statements taken from the books of fishing firms. -- - - - - 3364–3375 Gloucester Mutual Fishing Insurance Company: Policy of --...------------ 3449 - By-laws of, for 1876–1877.. 3452 Golt, Addison, jr. (Smith & Golt): Affidavit 73, United States case - - - - - - - - 3139 Goode, George Brown : Statistics of the fisheries of the North Atlantic States ---------------------------------------------------------------- 3360–3364 Goodwin, Daniel: Affidavit 113, British case.......... • * * * * * me s = * * * * * * * * * * * 1232 34.78 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Page. Goodwin, A. E. : Affidavit 251, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3318 Googins, Edward A. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. --- - - - - - - - - - 2448–2453 Gorman, John E.: Affidavit 38, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - • * * * * * * * 3099 Grady, Thomas : Affidavit 36, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3097 Graham, James W. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - - 2095–2114 Graham, John : Affidavit 32, British case.-------------------------------- 1134 Grant, Angus: Evidence in behalf of Great Britain. ----...----...---------- 597–614 Grant, John : Affidavit 186, United States case.----------...----...----. ---- 3.256 Gray, Elvarado: Evidence on behalf of the United States. ---...----...----. 2418–24:32 Great Britain : Case of.-------------------------------------------------- 77–117 Greenleaf, William : Affidavit 225, United States case.--------...----...----. 3295 Grenier, Grégoire: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain ... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 411–417 Griffin, Levi: Affidavit 209, United States case. --...----...----------...----. 3283 Groser, Jacob : Affidavit 82, British case. --------------------------------- 1198 Gross, B. O. (Union Wharf Company): Affidavit 83, United States case.... . 3151 Grouchy, David : Affidavit 143, British case .--------------...------------. 1267 Grouchy, Philip : Affidavit 96, British case.-----------------------...------- 1214 Grove, Judge : His opinion on the limits of maritime jurisdiction quoted.--. 157 Gruchy (Grouchy), David : Affidavit 185, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.256 Hø. Hackett, Edward : Affidavit 18, British case. ---...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -...----. 1117 Haddon, William : Affidavit 243, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -...----. 1378 Hadley, James B. : Affidavit 46, British case. -----------. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1159 Halifax, vice admiralty court: Return of American vessels seized for viola- tion of convention of 1818, dated July 30, 1852. ----...----...------------. 1472 Halifax : Correspondence in 1870, between United States Consul Jackson and Vice-Admiral Wellesley------------------------------------- • * * * * * * ºn tº dº tº º 1494–1495 Hall, Edward G. : Affidavit 127, British case. ... ... -----...----...--...---- 1247 Hall, Isaac C. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. --- - - - - - - - - -. - - - - 2854–2871 Hamilton, James R. : Affidavit 24, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... - - - - - 3065 Hamilton, John R. : Affidavit 125, British case-------------...------...----. 1244 Hammond, S. B. : Affidavit 212, British case. ----------------------------- 1344 Hannan, Richard : Affidavit 42, United States case.----...----...----...----. 3103 Harbour, George : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 394-404 Hardinge, Captain Edward, Royal Navy: Evidence on behalf of Great Brit- ain ------------------------------------------------ * - s = s. s sº e sº 638–643 Report to Vice-Admiral Wellesley, September 17, 1870-...----...--- 1496 Hardy, Henry : Affidavit 40, United States case.----...- .....--------. ---. 3101 Harlow, Reuben : Affidavit 282, British case.----- - - - - - - -----...------..... 1416 Harrington, William H. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. - - - - - - - - - - -. 1046–1049 Statement of prices of mackerel in American mar- kets 1863 to 1877 -----------------------. • = • * ~ * 1048 Hart, Alfred W. : Affidavit 175, United States case.---...----...----...----...- 3.248 Harvey, Lieutenant-Governor, Fredericton, N. B. : Dispatch to General Campbell, January 27, 1838. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1462 Dispatch to Lord Glenelg, Fredericton, March 19. 1839.--------------------------------- 1464 Harvey, William : Affidavit 141, United States case.------------. -- -------- 3214 Haskell, Samuel : Affidavit 54, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '-------- 31.18 Hautefeuille, on the limits of maritime jurisdiction.----. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 164 Hay, Duncan : Affidavits of, concerning encroachments of United States fish- ermen, January 24, 1838.---------------------------------------------- 1462, 1463 Hays, William : Affiidavit 207, United States case.----...... ---. -, * * * * * * * * * 3280 Hayward, James S : Affidavits 49 and 50, British case ---...-------- - - - - - - - 1165 Hazen, Judge : Judgment in the case of the White Fawn. ----...--------. . 3381 Headlands: British instruction to draw line between, when six miles apart. 121 Headlands and bays: Question of opinion of Chief-Justice Cockburn. -- - - - - 159 - Opinions of Bluntschli, Klüber, Ortolan, Hautefeuille, 63 &Q ---------------------------------------------- 16. Hemlow, Henry, Sr. : Affidavit 266, British case --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -...... 1400 Herrick, William : Affidavit 236, United States case. - - - - - ,----...---...--. 3303 Herring fishing by Americans in British waters amounts to nothing. ------- 126 - of Newfoundland------------------------------ e = • - - - - - - - - 186 Hickman, George A. : Affidavit 166, British case.----...----...... ----...--. 1288 Hickman, Samuel G. : Affidavit 62, British case.--------...----...----...--. 1177 Hickson, James: Evidence in behalf of Great Britain. ----...-- - - - - - - - - - --. 901–912 Hill, Edward: Evidence in behalf of the United States.---...----- • * is sº e s sº us e tº 2714–2721 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. - 34.79 Page. Hill, Hamilton A. : Affidavit as to statistics submitted on behalf of the United States --------------------------------------------------------- 3357 Hilliard, J. D. (Freeman & Hilliard): Affidavit 87, United States case.----- 3155 Hind, Prof. Henry Youle: Evidence in rebuttal on behalf of Great Britain... 3399–3443 Hines, Byron : Affidavit 224, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3295 Hirtle (or Hurtle), Edward : Affidavit 132, British case.--...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1254 Hodgdom, Albion P. : Affidavit 128, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3200 Hodgdon, Freeman : Affidavit 1, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2977 Hodgdom, Stephen G. : Affidavit 126, United States case.--...---...--. - - - - - 3198 Holliday, John : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 856–864 Holman, Henry T. : Affidavit 169, British case. -----------...--------------. 1292 Hopkins, Alfred: Affidavit 106, British case.-----------------------------. 1224 Hopkins, Josiah : Evidence in behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1043–1046 Hopkins, Richard : Evidence in behalf of the United States.----...-- - - - - - - - 2461–2469 Horton, Edward A. : Affidavit 23, United States case.-----. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3060 Howard, Oliver F. : Affidavit 263, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3329 Howe, Hon. Joseph : Extract from a speech of, July, 1865. ---- * * * * * * * * * * * * - 1490 Howell, John : Affidavit 231, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3299 Howell, William : Affidavit 232, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3300 Howlan, Hon. Geo. Wm. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain... -- - - - - - - - - - 374–394 Howlett, James: Affidavit 31, British case -----...----------...------- ------ 1132 Hubert, Philip : Affidavit 57, British case---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------. 1171 Hulbert, Robert H. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. . . . .2432–2442, 2471—2482 Hurtle, Edward. (See Hirtle.) + Hutchinson, John P. : Affidavit 266, United States case.----...--...----. ---- 3333 Hyman, William : Affidavit 181, British case.----...----...----...-----...----. 1306 \ H. Ingersoll, David: Evidence on behalf of the United States. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1959–1981 ingraham, John H. : Affidavit 160, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3234 Ingraham, John L. : Affidavit 38, British case --------------------------- * - 1145 Inkpen, Robert : Affidavit 2, in rebuttal, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3444 Inshore fishery: Jurisdictional limitation to, within the three-mile line * claimed by the United States-- - - - - - - - - - ---------------- 122 Three miles line. Reply of Great Britain . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 169 Insurance, fishing : Policy and by-laws of the Gloucester Mutual Company. 3449, 3452 Ireland and Trefethen : Affidavit 80, United States case -----------...----. . 3147 J. Jack, Thomas S. (George Trefethen & Co.): Affidavit 117, United States case. 31.87 Jackman, Michael : Affidavit 75, British case ...... -----...----...----...----. 1190 Jackman, Richard : Affidavit 143, United States case .----...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3216 Jackson, M. M., United States consul at Halifax: Correspondence with Vice- Admiral Wellesley, August and September, 1870 - - - - - -...----...----...----. 1494, 1495 Jacobs, Solomon: Affidavit 259, United States case.----...---...----...----. 3324 Jameson, John S. : Affidavit 268, United States case--------------------...- 33.35 Jessop, James: Affidavit 211, British case.--------...-----...----...---------- 1342 Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. ----...----...----...---- 783–787 J. H. Nickerson, the : Judgment in the case of .----...---------...--------. 3395 Johnson, James: Affidavit 148, United States case. ----...----...----...----. . 3222 Johnstone, William : Affidavit 189, British case.--------------------...----. 1315 Jordan, William H. (Rowe & Jordan): Affidavit 67, United States case.---- 3132 Jordan. Winthrop S. (W. S. Jordan & Co.): Affidavit 116, United States case. 3186 Jordan & Blake: Affidavit 113, United States case .----...----...--...----. 31.83 Jost, Nathaniel: Affidavit 83, British case. ---...----...---...----...--------- 1200 Joyce, Hanson B. : Affidavit 248, United States case -----...--------------. 3.315 Judgments of British vice-admiralty courts in cases of United States fishing- vessels seized: 1. White Fawn: Hazen, J ----------------------------------------- 3381 2. Wampatuck: Sir William Young, J.-----...----------...----...----. 33-33 3. A. H. Wanson: Sir William Young, J.------------------------... 3388 4. A. J. Franklin : Sir William Young, J ---------------...----...----. 3391 5. J. H. Nickerson : Sir William Young, J.----...----...----...--.... . 3.395 - - - K. Kellogg, Mr. Commissioner: His written dissent from the award of Messrs. Peltosse and Galt ----------------------------------------------------- 76 ſkelly, William : Affidavit 114, British case................................ 1233 3480 ALPEIABETICAL INDEX. Page. Kemp, Barzillai: Evidence on behalf of the United States ------ - - - - - - - - - - 2028–2047 Rennedy, Andrew : Affidavit 237, British case. ---------------............. 1370. Kenney, Daniel W. : Affidavit 290, British case. ----...-...-----......... --... 1422 Kenney, Reuben C. : Affidavit 17, United States case ------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3035 Rilligrew, William : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. ..... - - - - - - - - - - - - 552–575. Kimberley, Earl: Dispatch to Governor Hill, of Newfoundland, London, June 17, 1871---------------------------------------------------------- 3349 Kirby, William H. : Affidavit 223, United States case ------...... --........ 3293. Klüber, on the limits of maritime jurisdiction.... -- - - - - - - - - - - --...------- 163. Knowles, Commander, of the Lapwing : Dispatch to Vice-Admiral Fan- shawe, November 7, 1870 -------------------. -------------------------- 1498 Rnowlton, Harvey: Affidavit 23, United States case - - - - - - - - .......... ---. 3060 Knowlton, Harvey, jr. : Affidavit 68, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 3133, Affidavit 226, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 3296, Knowlton, John C. : Evidence on behalf of the United States - - - - - - - - - . . . . . 2729–2740 L. Labrador coast : American monopoly of the fisheries of, in 1827. -- - - - - - - - - - 1457 Ladd, Byron P. : Affidavit 298, British case.----. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1427 Lafrance, Sixte: Affidavit 219, British case- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. * tº * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1353 Lahey, Thomas: Affidavit 112, British case.----...----. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1231 Taidlaw, George: Affidavit 200, United States case. ----...----- - - - - - - - - - - - - 3269. Lake, John, Sr. : Affidavit 167, British case.--------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1289 Lakeman, Joseph : Evidence on behalf of the United States. - - - - - - - - * - - - - - 2527–2534 Lamontaigne, T. J. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 792–797 Lane, Samuel and George E. (Samuel Lane & Bro.): Affidavit 56, United States case.------------------------------------------------------. .ad ºn s 4 ºn 3.120. Langley, George : Affidavit 170, United States case.----...-- - - - - - - - - - - - ---. 3243 Larkin, Alexander: Affidavit 20, British case. ----. -------. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - 1119. Larkin, Alexander Francis: Affidavit 5, British case------...--...----..... 1096 Larkin, William S. : Affidavit 23, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1121 Laurie, Andrew : Affidavit 193, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3263. Lawrence, George C. : Affidavit 45, British case.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1158. Leary, Patrick : Affidavit 74, British case...----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ſº 1189 Le Blanc, Frank: Affidavit 176, British case----------...--------...--------- 1299 Le Blanc, Isidore: Affidavit 144, British case ---. - - - - - - - ------------------- 1268 Affidavit 180, United States case. ----------. . . . . . . . . . . . 3253 Le Blanc, Simon P. : Affidavit 181, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.253. Lebrun, Abraham : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain.... . . . . . . . ----... 803—815 Le Brun, Francis : Affidavit 188, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1314 Lee, Charles : Affidavit 238, United States case ---------...--...----........ 3307 Legresley, John : Affidavit 170, British case.----...----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1293. Legros, John : Affidavit 172, British case ---------------------------------- 1295. Leighton, Andrew : Evidence on behalf of the United States.... ---------. 21.78–2204 Affidavit 26, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3073 Affidavit 221, United States case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3292. (Leighton & Co.): Affidavit 71, United States case.--. 3137 Lemontais, Philip : Affidavit 129, British case. -----------------------...--- 1249. Levanger, Edward: Affidavit 169, United States case.----. sº tº e º sº tº tº gº as tº sº dº º ºs & 3242 Levesconte, Isaac : Affidavit 148, British case.----------. . . . . . . . . --------- 1272 Levesconte, William : Affidavit 183, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3255. Lewis, Allen: Affidavit 127, United States case... ---. -----. * * * * de up ºr se º 'º & gº tº sº tº gº 3109 Lewis, Bangs A : Evidence on behalf of the United States. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2087–2095 Lewis, B. A. (B.A. Lewis & Co.): Affidavit 92, United States case-...---- 3161 Lewis, Jesse: Affidavit 270, United States case --...----...----...--------- 33.38 Lewis, Philip : Affidavit 100, British case.----...- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1219. Lewis, T. C. (Lewis, Whitten & Co.): Affidavit 114, United States case --- 3184 Licenses, Canadian fishery: Correspondence between Mr. Fish and Sir E. Thornton relative to abolition of.----------------...----. tº dº º ºs º º 154, 155 Light-houses: in Canada, list of, used by United States fishermen - - - - - - - - - - 1088 on Newfoundland coast : cost of maintenance. - - - - - sº º ºr tº tº gº tº ºn tº gº 1410 Lindley, Judge: His opinion on maritine limits of jurisdiction quoted. .... 157 Lloyd, John : Affidavit 152, British case ---...----...----...----------------- 1275 Lloyd, William : Affidavit 213, British case.-----------------. ----------- tº 1344 locke, Austen: Affidavit 240, British case -------------------------------. 1374 Lohnes: Isaac : Affidavit 92, British case -------------...------------------. 1209. Londrigan, Lawrence: Evidence on behalf of the United States. -----...-- 2460 Lord, James: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. ----. ---...------------- 717-732. ALPFIABETICAL INDEX. 3481 Page." Low, Benjamin (David Low & Co.): Affidavit 70, United States case - - - - - - 3136 Low, Major David W.; Evidence and statistics on behalf of the United States----------------------------------------------------------- 2590–2696 Lowrie, Charles : Affidavit 197, United States case...--------...----. s ſº e - ºr - & 3266 Luce, John M. : Affidavit 179, British case .------------------------------- 1303. MI. Macauley, Michael : Evidence on behalf of the United States. ----. - - - - - - - - 2327—23.45. MacDonald, Alexander: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain.------------- 1022. Macdonald, Sir John A.: His views respecting reciprocity quoted in the - United States case.---------------------------------------- 127 Macdonald, John D. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain.----...--------- 986–995 Macdonald, John R. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 976–986. Macdonald, Laughlin : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1019. Macdonnell, Wm. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 843–855 Mackenzie, George : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain.----...----- - - - - - - 458–502 Mackerel: A Small amount caught within the three-mile Zone.----- - - - - - - - 9 Character of bait for----------------------- - - - - as º ºs e - - -º º ºr * = - - - - 129 British claim that the greater part of the catch is within the three- mile limit.-------------------------------------------------- 174 American catch ; report of Pierre Fortin ---. ---...----- - - - - - - - - - 218 United States catch at Port Mulgrave, Nova Scotia, during 1873, 1874-------------------------------------------------------- 222–229 Statement of prices of, in American markets, 1863–1877. -- - - - - - - - 1048 Mr. Noble's statements of prices, 1861–1877- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1056–1062 Imports into the United States from British North America.----. 3353. Imports into the port of Boston from British North America.----. 3354 Inspected at Portsmouth and New Castle, N. H.- ... ... -- - - - - - - - - - 3375 and herring : Annual importation into the United States.... ---- 3352, 3353. fishery: British statement of its value and extent. ---...-- - - - - - - - 90. r Professor Baird's views respecting, quoted in the United States answer.---------------------------------- * Wºl - º º 124 In Canadian waters declining.-----------------...------- 125 In United States inshore waters ----------------------- 130 Maclean, James R. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 281–304 Maddocks, Benjamin : Evidence on behalf of the United States.----- - - - - - - 2159–21.78 (B. Maddocks & Co.): Affidavit 51, United States case. - 3114 Maddox, Lewis: Affidavit 129, United States case.-----...---- º an a s as we me as as as tº º 3201 Maddox, William T. : Affidavit 123, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.194 Maguire, John : Evidence in behalf of Great Britain. ----...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 655–668 Maine: Summary of the annual returns of the inspector-general of fish, 1866-1873 ------------------------------------------------------------ - 3376 Malouin, Alexis : Affidavit 205, British case. -----...----------...----------- 1335 Mansfield, Alfred : Affidavit 32, United States case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3093 Manter, Prince (Manter & Blackmer): Affidavit 99, United States case. ---. 3168 Maritime jurisdiction in bays and between headlands: Opinions of inter- national Writers on---------------------------------------------------- 163–166 Marmeau, Francis: Affidavit 142, British case -------------...------------- 1266 Affidavit 178, United States case. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3251 Marshall, E. : Affidavit 36, British case -----------...----------------------- 1140 Martens on the limits of maritime jurisdiction. ----...---...----------...----- 165 Martin, Charles: Affidavit 257, United States case .----. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3322 Martin, Stephen J. : Evidence on behalf of the United States -- - - - - - - - 2316–2327, 2344 Mass, William J. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2816–2821 Massachusetts : Extract from Sixth Annual Report of commissioners of in- land fisheries of .-------------------------------------- 238 Analysis of reports of inspectors of mackerel, showing the number of barrels inspected.--------------------------- 3377 Statements showing the number of barrels of mackerel sub- mitted annually for inspection and reinspection from 1850 to 1876------------------------------------------------ 3378 Statistical information; returns by the deputy inspector of fish for 1851 ------------------------------------------- 3379 Statement of the vessels owned in, employed in the mack- erel fishery in 1853------------------------------------- 3380 Matheson, Angus: Affidavit 121, British case.--------...--------...--------- 1240 Matthews, Allan : Affidavit 246, British case -----...--...--- .----...------- 1380 3482 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Page. Matthews, Parker: Affidavit 278, British case.---------...----. . . . . . . . . . . . . - 1412 McAdams, Daniel: Affidavit 241, British case.----------------------------- 1375 McAdams, John : Affidavit 259, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1395 McAlpine, William H. : Affidavit 150, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3225 McAuley, Luke : Affidavit 230, United States case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3299 McCauley, Luke: Affidavit 208, British case.------------------- - - - - - - - - - - 1338 McClintock, W. G. and John H. (John McClintock & Co.): Affidavit 134, United States case.-------------------. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3206 McCormack, Daniel: Affidavit 305, 13ritish case-...----...------------------. 1437 McDonald, Alexander: Affidavit 272, British case.----...-------------...--. 1407 McDonald, Alexander : Affidavit 272, United States case --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3340 McDonald, Allan: Affidavit 162, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3236 McDonald, Angus: Affidavit 306, British case.------------. -------------- 1438 McDonald, Daniel : Affidavit 202, United States case. ----...-- - - - - - - - - - - - -. 3271 McDonald, Donald : Affidavit 163, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3237 McDonald, James: Affidavit 13, British case ----...----------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1110 Affidavit 40, British case - - - - - - - - - - ------------------- 1149 Affidavit 304, British case -------. -------------------- 1436 McDonald, John : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - ---. . . . 967–971 Affidavit 24, United States case -----------. ------------ 3065 McDonald, John R. : Affidavit 33, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1135 McDonald, Lewis: Affidavit 136, United States case ---...----...----. .----. 3209 McDonald, Matthew : Affidavit 215, United States case..... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3288 McDonald, Michael : Affidavit 156, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... ge 1277 Affidavit 309, British case -------------------- - - - - - - - 1442 McDonald, Peter: Affidavit 307, British case.-----------...----------------. 1440 McDonald, Robert J. : Affidavit 153, British case---------. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1275 McDonald, Roderick: Affidavit 201, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3270 McDonald, Ronald : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. --...----. 5 * * * * * * 1008–1014 McDonald, William H. : Evidence on behalf of the United States.......... 2404–2411 McDougall, Donald: Affidavit 139, British case. -------------------------- 1264 McDougall, Robert : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 876–882 McDougall, Simon : (McDougall & Race): Affidavit 132, United States case 3204 McEachan, Charles : Affidavit 313, British case -------------------------.. 1449 McEachren, Donald : Affidavit 142, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3215 McEachren, Duncan : Affidavit 199, United States case.----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3268 McFadyen, Malcolm : Affidavit 29, British case.--------------------------- 1128 McGrath, Richard : Affidavit 72, British case.----------------------------- 1187 McInnis, James: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. ----------...---- - - - 1021–1022 McInnis, John : Evidence in behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2269–2275 McInnis, Michael: Affidavit 161, British case.----------------------------. 1283 McIntyre, Daniel: Affidavit 315, British case. ---------------------------- 1451 McIntyre, John : Affidavit 308, British case. ------------------------. ----- 1442 McIsaac, Barnaby : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain.----...----...---- r - 950–957 McIsaac, Clement : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1017, 1018 McIsaac, James : Affidavit 267, United States case .....----...-...----...--. 3333 McKay, Alexander: Affidavit 109, British case.----------------------...-- 1227 McKay, James: Evidence in behalf of Great Britain -----...----...--------. 614–628 McKay, John : Affidavit 294, British case ---------------------...----------- 1425 McKay, Wm. H., harbor-master of Princetown: Dispatch to Colonial Secre- tary Warburton, July 2, 1852 ---------------------------------- 1471 McKeen, James G. : Affidavit 176, United States case -----...----. ---------- 3249 McKenzie, Alexander: Affidavit 249, British case.----------...----...------- 1383 McKenzie, Colin : Affidavit 34, British case----...-- - - - - - - - - -------------- 1137 McKenzie, George : Affidavit 43, British case -----...----...-, - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1154 McKinnon, Dougald: Affidavit 203, United States case.----...----...----.... 3272 McKinnon, John H. : Affidavit 218, United States case.----...----...----. ---. 3290 McLaughlin, Walter B. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. ----...--...--- 732–756 McLean, Daniel C. : Affidavit 314, British case ---------...----...----------. 1450 McLean, James: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain.----...----...----... 698–717 McLean, Joseph: Affidavit 250, United States case -----...----...----...----- 3318 McLellan, John : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain.--...----...----...--.. 1022--1023 McLeod, Colin: Affidavit 262, British case.... --------- is e = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1397 McLeod, George : Affidavit 151, British case.-----------------------------. 1274 McLeod, James: Affidavit 110, British case-----------------------------... 1229 McLeod, John A. : Affidavit 303, British case.----------------------------- 1433 McLeod, William : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain...------...--------- 417–446 Affidavit 245, British case ---------. -------------------- 1379 McNair, James: Affidavit 158, United States case .... ...................... 3233 ALPHABETICAL INDEX, 3483 Page McNeil, Daniel : Affiflavit 276, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3343 McNeill, Alexander M. : Affidavit 1, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1091 McNeill, John G. : Affidavit 42, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1153 McNeill, William : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 343–359 McPhee, Daniel: Affidavit 28, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1127 McPhee, James: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 963–967 McPhee, John J. : Affidavit 39, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. sº 1147 McPhee, Joseph : Affidavit 239, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3308 McPherson, Hugh : Affidavit 171, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3244 McRay, Thomas: Affidavit 209, British case. ----...--...----. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1340 Menhaden as bait : Scarcity of, on the United States coast alleged in British 99 CaSé - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *s, * * * * * * * * g º us as as s ºf its tº sº tº Menhaden fishery in United States waters: Value to Canadians as source of mackerel bait - - - - - - - •.9 se e ºs º gº tº e º ºs és is sº tº - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 129 Mercantile Wharf Company of Wellfleet, Mass.: Affidavit 96, United States 3165 C886 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mercer, Isaac : Affidavit 163, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1286 Merchant, John : Affidavit 285, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1418 Merritt, Gilbert : Affidavit 291, British case .-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1423 Miller, Richard: Affidavit 186, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1312 Mills, Peter H. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. - - - - - - - - - , . . . . . . . 2401–2404 Milner, Thomas : Affidavit 316, British case- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1452 Molloy, William [A.T.: Affidavit 208, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3282 Montgomery, Hugh John : Affidavit 3, British case.----. . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1092 Moore, William H. : Affidavit 161, United States case.----. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3235 Morey, Stephen B. : Affidavit 43, United States case- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - tº me sº sº m tº 3104 Morgan, Moses C. : Affidavit 204, United States case. ... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3273 Morien, John : Affidavit 134, British case.-------...----. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1256 Morrisay, James J. : Affidavit 17, British case. ... ----...----------...-- - - - - - 1115 Morry, Robert : Affidavit 77, British case. -- . . . . . . . .----. ...----...----...----- 1.191 Morse, Edward : Affidavit 108, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1226 Mosley, George E. : Affidavit 287, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - -, -----, -----. 14:20 Mourant, Joshua : Affidavit 175, British case ----...----...------------------- 1298 Mullins, Patrick: Affidavit 234, British case. ----------------...-------...----. 1367 Mulloy, William H. : Affidavit 53, British case. . . . . . . . . . .----...----...----- 1167 Munn, Robert Stewart: Affidavit 48, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1162 Statements attached to affidavit. - - - - - - - - - - - gº tº ºi º ºs º 1164, 1165 Munroe, Matthew : Affidavit 257, British case...----...----...----...----. ---- 1393 Munroe, William : Affidavit 256, British case.----------------...----- gº an e º 'º º 1392 Murphy, Bryan, Affidavit 145, British case ...-------------...--...----------. 1269 Murphy, Dennis C. : Affidavit 227, United States case... --- ----------------- 3.297 Murphy, George : Affidavit 157, British case -----...----- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1278 Murphy, John ; Affidavit 120, British case ...... ---...----...--------- tº º ºs º º & 1239 Murray, David, jr. : Affidavit 247, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - ---...----...----. 1380 Murray, John : Affidavit 159, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3234 Myrick, James H. : Evidence on behalf of the United States ... ----. -------. 2740–2765 N. Nass, Charles E. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1001–1005 Nearing, William : Affidavit 111, British case. -----...----...---. -- . . . . . . . . 1231 Nelson, Chresten : Evidence on behalf of the United States. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2765–2777 Nelson, William H. : Affidavit 15, United States case... - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... v e º ºn as we 3028 (Nelson & Harlow): Affidavit 98, United States case .. 3167 Newcomb, Daniel C.: Evidence on behalf of the United States.----...----. 2114–2121 Newhook, Thomas L. : Affidavit 107, British case - ,----...-----...----...----. 1225 New Brunswick, assembly of: Report on encroachments of United States fishermen, March 18, 1839.---------...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1464 Vice-admiralty court of: List of American vessels prosecuted, October 11, 1852--------------------------------------. 1481 council and assembly of: Address to the Queen, November 1, 1859.----------------------------------------------- 1481 Address to the Queen from citizens of St. John, January, * * * * * * * * * * * * * * tº se sº * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * = me as º as as sº sº us as sº e º ºr m sº wº 1485 Memorial to the Queen from citizens of Northumberland County, January 5, 1853 ------------------------------- 1486 Newfoundland: Description of the fisheries of ........ --...------...----... 100 Advantages derived by United States citizens from the fish- eries of --------------- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * sº º vº º ºs ºn tº * * * * * > tº ſº º ºs º º 103 3484 ALPIIABETICAL INDEX. Page. Newfoundland : Amount of award claimed in respect of.----...-- - - - - - - - - - - 107 Status of, under the Washington Treaty, as claimed in the United States answer.---------------------...---------> 122, 136 Status of, under the Washington Treaty, as claimed in the British reply------------------------------------------ 182—187 Cod and herring fisheries -------------------------------- 185–186 Light-houses and cost of maintenance--- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1410 Commons of: Address to the Queen, April 23, 1853 - - - - - - - - 1489 Returns of fish imports and exports of, 1851 to 1876.----... 1509–1519 Dispatch of Earl Kimberley to governor of, June 17, 1871. 3349 Nicholson, John : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain....... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - 643–655 Nicholson, Luther (Union Wharf Company): Affidavit 83, United States CaS6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3151 Nicholson, Nicholas: Affidavit 198, United States case .----. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3267 Nickerson, Atkins (Central Wharf Company): Affidavit 84, United States CaSe- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3152 Nickerson, Caleb : Affidavit 19, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 3042 Niekerson, Henry : Affidavit 97, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 3166 Nickerson, James A. : Affidavit 37, British case - - - - --...----. -- - - - - - - - - - - - 1142 Nickerson, Stephen, Stephen E., and Alonzo R. (S. Nickerson & Sons): Affi- davit 133, United States case -------------------------------. 3205 Noble, Robert G. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1055–1064 Statements of prices of mackerel -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1056–1062 Noil, Alexis: Affidavit 191, British case.----------------...----...----...----. 1317 Noil, Francis: Affidavit 210, British case.--------. -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1341 Norton, B. H., United States consul at Pictou : Letter to Sir A. Bannerman, October 28, 1852------------------------------------------------------- 1487 Norwood, George: Affidavit 25, United States case. ----...----- - - - - - - - - - - - - 3069 Norwood, George and Frederic (George Norwood & Son): Affidavit 65, United States case -------------------------------------------------- 3130 Nova Scotia : Return of fishing-vessels of the United States at Port Mulgrave and their catch in 1873 and 1874---------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 222–229 Light-houses on the coast of, used by United States fishermen. 1088 Address of the council and assembly of, to the King, concern- ing encroachments of United States fishermen. ..... -- - - - - - 1458 Address to the Queen on the same subject. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1460 assembly of : Address to the Queen, February 17, 1853 - - - - - - i483 representatives of: Address to the Queen, March 30, 1853 - - - - 1483 Council of : Address to the Queen, April 4, 1853 - - - - - - -...----- 1484 (See Encroachments.) Nowlan, James: Affidavit 41, British case -----------...----...---. -------- 1151 Nute, Charles H. : Affidavit 213, United States case --- - - - - - - - - - -...----...--- 3.287 O. Oakley, Joseph : Affidavit 214, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.287 O’Brien, Edward: Affidavit 101, British case-...---------...---------------. 1220 O'Connor, Maurice: Affidavit 19, British case. --------------------------- * 1118 O'Connor, William : Affidavit 178, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1302 Oliver, D. W. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2132,2133 Open-sea fisheries: British reply on question of purchase of bait for - - - - - - - - 173–176 Orange, Daniel: Affidavit 174, British case- - - - - - - - - - - - - -, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1297 Orne, Charles H. : Evidence on behalf of the United States - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2148–2158 Orne, Freeman : Affidavit 124, United States case.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3195 Ortolan on the limits of maritime jurisdiction - - - - - - - - - - ... ---. . . . . .----. * * 163 Outhouse, Amos H. : Affidavit 284, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1417 Outhouse, Whitefield : Affidavit 295, British case. ... ---...----...----...---- 1425 P. Packwood, John : Affidavit 192, British case. - - - - - - - - - -. * e º se º ºs e s s = * * * * * * * * 1319 Paine, Joshua : Evidence on behalf of the United States - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2074–2083 Paine, J. and L. N. : Affidavit 90, United States case. --- - - - - - - - - - - -------- 31.59 Paint, Sr., Peter: Affidavit 44, British case ------------------------------- 1157 Paquet, Marshal: Affidavit 25, British case. ------------------------------ 1124 Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... 942-950 Parkhurst, Charles E. : Affidavit 277, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3343 Parsons, Stephen : Affidavit 104, British Case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1222 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. , 3485 Page. Parsons, Thomas L., Eben, 2d, and George (William Parsons, 2d, & Co.): - Affidavit 63, United States Case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. *s sº m sº sº sº º tº 3128 Parsons, William, 2d : Affidavit 240, United States case. ----...-- - - - - - - - - - - - 3309 Affidavit 258, United States case -----...-- - - - - - - - - - * 3.324 Pattillo, James W. : Evidence on behalf of the United States........ ... --. 2777–2795 Patillo, Thomas R.: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 971–976 Paul, Richard : Affidavit 70, British case --------------------------------- 1184 Payson, Charles H. : Affidavit 288, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1421 Payson, Holland C. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1014–1017 Payson, Joseph D. : Affidavit 197, British case .----...----------------...--. 1324 Peach, John : Affidavit 117, British case-----------------------------. ---- 1236 Peeples, Ebenezer C. : Affidavit 156, United States case. - - - - - - - - - , ... -- - - - - - 3231 Peeples, James: Affidavit 152, United States case. -----. gº sº me ºn tº dº sº tº tº Eg tº º ºs e º 'º gº º 3226. Peeples, Samuel H. : Affidavit 157, United States case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3232 Peeples, Samuel P. : Affidavit 153, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3227 Peirce, Moses E. (M. E. Peirce & Co.): Affidavit 125, United States case - - - 3196 Pennell, Henry : Affidavit 73, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1187 Perkins, W. H., W. H., jr., George, and George H. (Perkins Brothers): Affi- davit 46, United States case.-------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - 3.108 Perley, M. H. : Extracts from his report on the fisheries of New Brunswick 220–221 Perry, Gilbert : Affidavit 21, British case. ----------...--------...----. ---- 1120 Perry, Stanislas F., (see Poirier) Perry, William : Evidence on behalf of the United States. ---...- - - - - - - - - - 2493–2497 Pettes, James A.: Evidence on behalf of the United States ... - - - - - - - . . . . . . 2920–2931 Pettengell, Charles D. : Affidavit 50, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 31.13 Pettingill, Charles C. : Affidavit 14, United States case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3024 Pettingill, Moses: Evidence on behalf of the United States ... - - - - - - - - - - - - - 21:21–2128 PéW, Charles H. : Affidavit 31, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3092 Evidence on behalf of the United States - - - - - ... - - - - - - - - 2879–2907 Pew, John J. (John J. Pew & Son): Affidavit 47, United States case. ... ---. 31.10 Phelan, James: Affidavit 158, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. as º ºs º º ºs º ºs º º 1280 Phelan, John : Affidavit 218, British case. --------------------------------- 1351 Phillamore, Captain : Extract from dispatch to Vice-Admiral Fanshawe, November 15, 1870 ---------------------------------------------------- 1497 Phillimore : His opinion as to the limits of maritime jurisdiction (see brief) 156 Phillips, David : Affidavit, 185, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1311 Picot, James : Affidavit 98, British case ---...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1217 Pierce, Albion K. : Affidavit 24, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3065 Affidavit 260, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.325 Pine, Owen : Affidavit 69, British case ---...------------------------------- 1184 Pine, Philip : Affidavit 67, British case ---...---...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1182 Pinkham, Thomas : Affidavit 281, British case -----. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $$, º ſº tº * s tº 1416 Plover : List of American fishing-vessels boarded by, during July and Au- gust, 1870------------------------------------------------------------- 1501 Plumer, G. W. : Affidavit 22, United States case...----------...-----------.- 3055 Evidence on behalf of the United States - - - - - - - - - -...----. 2007–2920 Poirier, Stanislas François : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain ---...----. 359–370 Pool, Solomon : Affidavit 241, United States case...----------------...----- 3.309 IPoole, Christopher C. : Affidavit 234, United States case ... - - - - - - - - - -...----. 3302 Port Hood: Abstract of the state of the papers of British vessels at, in 1852 1481 Power, Mr., of the Canadian Parliament: His views as to the advantage of reciprocity quoted -------------------------------------------- 127, 132 Power, Stephen: Affidavit 3, in rebuttal, British case ---...--...----...---. 3445 Price, Henry: Affidavit 180, British case.--------------. ------------------ 1305 Prince Edward Island: Documents filed relative to American fishing in wa- ters of British case. ---------. ------------------ 190–196 Quantity and value of fish exported from, 1850–1872. 235–237 Council and assembly of, petition to the Queen, March 24, 1843.-------------------------------- 1465 Council and assembly of, address to the Queen, Feb- ruary 9, 1852 ----------------------------------- 1469 Memorandum of vice-admiralty court relative to seizures of fishing-vessels.------------...-------- 1489 List of foreign vessels boarded within 3 miles of, in - 1872 ------------------------------------------- 1504 List of American vessels seen, but not boarded, in 1872 ------------------------------------------- 1508 Correspondence relating to encroachments of United States fishermen since 1818. (See Encroachments.) 34.86 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Page. Prival, George: Affidavit 215, British case.---------------------...----... 1346 Proctor, A. G. : Affidavit 76, United States case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 3143 Proctor, Joseph O. : Affidavit 53, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 31.17 - Evidence on behalf of the United States..... - - - - - - - - - - 2275–2312 Protocols of each day’s conference: - I. June 15, 1877. Organization and rules.---------...----...----- 11 II. June 16, 1877. Records of last conference read. --., -...----...--- 15 III. July 28, 1877. Answers, replies, and briefs filed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 15 IV. July 30, 1877. British case and American answer read. - - - - - - - - 16 V. July 31, 1877. American answer and British reply read........ 17 VI. August 1, 1877. British evidence. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- - 17 VII. August 2, 1877. British evidence continued. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18 VIII. August 3, 1877. British evidence continued.----. ... --...------ 18 IX. August 6, 1877. British evidence continued.----. - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19 X. August 7, 1877. British affidavits -------. -- - - - - -----...----... 20 XI. August 8, 1877. British evidence continued.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 21 XII. August 9, 1877. British evidence continued - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 22 XIII. August 10, 1877. British evidence continued. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --. 22 XIV. August 13, 1877. British evidence continued. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 23 XV. August 14, 1877. British evidence continued.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 24 XVI. August 15, 1877. British evidence continued.----. * * * * * * * * * * * * 24 XVII. August 16, 1877. British evidence continued - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... . 25 XVIII. August 17, 1877. British evidence continued. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 25 XIX. August 20, 1877. British evidence continued. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 26 XX. August 21, 1877. British evidence continued - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 28 XXI. August 22, 1877. British evidence continued. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 29 XXII. August 23, 1877. British evidence continued. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 30 XXIII. August 24, 1877. British evidence continued - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 31 YXIV. August 27, 1877. British and American evidence -- - - - - - - - - - - - 32 XXV. August 28, 1877. British evidence; proposal of United States consul --------------------------------------------------- 33 XXVI. August 29, 1877. British evidence ; procedure as to addresses - altered.-------------------------------------------------- 36 XXVII. August 30, 1877. British evedence continued.----...----. . . • * * * * 37 XXVIII. August 31, 1877. British evidence continued.--...-- - - - - - - - - - - - 38 YXIX. September 1, 1877. Question of commercial award. - - - - - - - - - - - 39 XXX. September 3, 1877. British evidence continued - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 40 XXXI. September 4, 1877. British evidence continued. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 42 XXXII. September 5, 1877. Arguments as to commercial privileges ... . 43 XXXIII. September 6, 1877. Commercial awards excluded ... ---...----. - 44 XXXIV. September 7, 1877. British evidence continued -----...---.... 45 XXXV. September 17, 1877. British evidence continued - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 47 XXXVI. September 18, 1877. British evidence continued - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 48 XXXVII. September 19, 1877. United States cases opened. Evidence... 30 XXXVIII. September 20, 1877. United States evidence continued... ---. . 50 XXXIX. September 21, 1877. United States evidence continued -----. . . 51 XL. September 22, 1877. United States evidence continued ... ---. . . 51 XLI. September 24, 1877. United States evidence continued ... ---. . . 52 XLII. September 25, 1877. United States evidence continued -----. . . 53 IXLIII. September 26, 1877. United States evidence continued ... ---... 54 XLIV. September 27, 1877. United States evidence continued -----. . . 54 XLV. September 28, 1877. United States evidence continued -----... 55 XLVI. October 1, 1877. United States evidence continued ... - - - - - - - - . 56 XLVII, October 2, 1877. United States evidence continued. ... - - - - - - - - - 56 XLVIII. October 3, 1877. United States evidence continued... - - - - - - - - - 57 XLIX. October 4, 1877. United States evidence continued - - - - - - - - - - - - 58 L. October 5, 1877. United States evidence continued. - - - - - - - - - - - 59 LI. October 8, 1877. United States evidence continued... -- - - - - - - - - 60 LII. October 9, 1877. United States evidence continued... -- - - - - - - - 61 LIII. October 10, 1877. United States evidence continued. -- - - - - - -. - 62 LIV. October 11, 1877. United States evidence continued. -- - - - - - - - - 62 LV. October 12, 1877. United States evidence continued.----...-. - 63 LVI. October 15, 1876. United States evidence continued. - - - - - - - - - - 63 LVII. October 16, 1877. United States evidence continued - - - - , ----. - 64 LVIII. October 17, 1877. United States evidence continued... - - - - - - - - 65 LIX. October 18, 1877. United States evidence continued.... ... --. - 65 LX. October 19, 1887. United States evidence continued. - - - - - - - -. *- 66 LXI. October 22, 1877. United States evidence continued.... ... --. - 66 LXII. October 23, 1877. United States evidence continued - - - - -...... 67 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. 34.87 Page. Protocols of each day’s conference—Continued. Pag III. October 24, 1877. United States evidence continued..... - - - -. sº 68 LXIV. October 25, 1877. British rebutting evidence ... --...- - - - - - - - - * , 69 LXV. October 26, 1877. British rebutting evidence continued - - - - - - - - 69 LXVI. November 1, 1877. British rebutting evidence continued - - - - - - 70 LXVII. November 5, 1877. United States closing arguments begun -- - - 71 LXVIII. November 6, 1877. United States closing arguments continued. 71 LXIX. November 8, 1877. United States closing arguments continued. 72 LXX, November 9, 1877. United States closing arguments continued. 72 LXXI, November 10, 1877. United States closing arguments con- cluded -------------------------------------------------- <- 72 LXXII. November 15, 1877. British closing arguments begun -------. . 73 LXXIII. November 16, 1877. British closing arguments continued... . . . 73 LXXIV. November 17, 1877. British closing arguments continued - - - - - - 7 LXXV. November 19, 1877. British closing arguments continued. --- - - 74 LXXVI. November 20, 1877. British closing arguments continued - - - - - - 75 LXXVII. November 21, 1877. British closing arguments concluded - - - - - - 75 LXXVIII. November 23, 1877. Award pronounced. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -------- 76 Prowse, Samuel : Affidavit 27, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1126 Publicover, Geoffrey W. : Affidavit 251, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1385 Publicover, James: Affidavit 138, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1263 Purcell, James: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 628–638 Purney, John : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. ----. . . . . .----...----. 1049–1055 - R. Race, James L. (McDougall & Race): Affidavit 132, United States case- - - - - 3204 Rebutting testimony and affidavits on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - 3399–3448 Reciprocity: Views of prominent Canadian statesmen as to advantages to the Dominion, quoted in the United States case. -- - - - - 127, 128, 131–135 Advantage claimed to be in favor of the United States. -- - - - - 179–182 Reed, Levi : Affidavit 130, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3202 Reeves, James: Affidavit 64, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1179 Reeves, Robert J. : Affidavit 222, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3293 Remon, Thomas C. : Affidavit 177, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 1301 Rennels, Isaac W. : Affidavit 258, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1394 Renouf, John : Affidavit 223, British case ---. ---------------------, - - - - - - - 1357 Reply of Great Britain to the answer of the United States - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 169 Rich, Abner B. (Central Wharf Company): Affidavit 84, United States case. 3152 Rich, Marshall N. : Affidavit 12, United States case.----...----...----...----. 301t; Richard, James S. : Affidavit 81, British case.----...--------------...----. sº 1196 Richard, John Daniel: Affidavit 261, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1397 Richard, Elias: Affidavit 136, British case------------------...----. ------- 1260 Richardson, Peter S. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 995–1001 Riggs, Aaron : Evidence on behalf of the United States. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2204–2213 Riser, Rufus : Affidavit 133, British case. ----------------...---------. ---- 1256 Risser, Dan : Affidavit 89, British case -------------------------...--------- 1206 Ritcey, Thomas, Sr. : Affidavit 253, British case. ----. -----. ---------- - - - - - 1387 Roberts, Thomas C. : Affidavit 80, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -, * * * * * * 1195 Roberts, Thomas E. : Affidavit 255, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3320 Robertson, Hilaire: Affidavit 159, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1280 Robertson, Michael: Affidavit 250, British case-------------...----...-- - - - - 1384 Rogerson, James J. : Affidavit 51, British case--------...----...------------- 1166 Rogerson, Hon. James J. : Affidavit 162, and statement of fish exports from - Newfoundland, British case-------------------------------------------- 1284 Romeril, George : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. -- - - - - - - - , - * * * * * * * * * 838–843 Rooney, James: Affidavit 187, British case. -----...--- • = • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1312 Rooney, Michael: Affidavit 235, British case.----------...----------...----. 1369 Rose, George : Affidavit 54, British case.-------...-------...----. ---. e- tº ºne º E. E. 1168 Affidavit 6, in rebuttal, British case ... --...- .. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3447 Rose, John : Affidavit 56, British case.----. ------------------------------ 1170 Ross, Daniel : Affidavit 302, British case.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - fº gº º sº, sº º ſº as ºn sº * * * * * * * * 1432 Ross, William : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 914—926 Rowe, John J. : Evidence on behalf of the United States.----...----...----. 2213–2231 Rowe, Joseph (Rowe & Jordan): Affidavit 67, United States case.--...----. 3132 Evidence on behalf of the United States - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2931–2943 Rowe, Samuel T. : Evidence on behalf of the United States... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2362–2378 Rowe, William D. : Affidavit 262, United States case ...----...----..... ---. 3328 Roy, Louis : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain... ----........ .......... 815–817 3488 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Page. Royal Gazette of Charlottetown : Extract from, June 26, 1838. -----. ... ---. 1463 Ruggles, Benjamin H. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain..... . . . . . . . . . 1036–1042 Rules for the procedure of the Halifax Commission.----. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 13 Rules of procedure before the Commission amended. ... -- ------------------ 35, 36 Rumsey, Thomas: Affidavit No. 1 in rebuttal, British case. ...... --- - - - - - - - 3443 Ryan, Martin : Affidavit 191, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3262 Ryan, Philip : Affidavit 192, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3262 Ryerson, Samuel M. : Affidavit 300, British case------...------------------- 1429 S. Samuel, James: Affidavit 194, British case. ------------------------------- 1321 Saunders, John E. : Affidavit 41, United States case ------...--------------- 3102 Savage, Thomas: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. ----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 756–770 Sawyer, J. W. and Robert H. (J. W. Sawyer & Co.): Affidavit 118, United States case.----------------------------------------------------------- 3.189 Sayward, Daniel : Affidavit 62, United States case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3127 Sayward, Epes, jr., and George : Affidavit 61, United States case -- - - - - - - - - - 3126 Seaboyer, Gabriel : Affidavit 233, British case.----...-- - - - - - - ** ºn tº sº as as tº tº nº me tº ºn tº sº 1365 Seaboyer, James S. : Affidavit 252, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1386 Seymour, Vice-Admiral: Dispatch to the Secretary of the Admiralty con- cerning American encroachments, October 30, 1852 ------------------------------------------ 1474 Dispatch to the Secretary of the Admiralty, No- Vember 18, 1852------------------------------- 1475 Shipping-papers of fishing vessels: Copy of, form employed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3456 Short, John : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. ... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 797–801 Simms, George : Affidavit 168, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * 1290 Sinclair, Peter: Affidavit 261, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3327 Sinette, Joseph : Affidavit 217, British case.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - -* * * * is a es sº sº, sº a se as sº ºn sº 1349 Sinnett, William A. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 404–411 Sirois, Josef O. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 802—803 Sirois, Philias: Affidavit 222, British case.-------------------------------- 1356 Skinner, Archibald B. : Affidavit 255, British case .----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1391 Skerry, James: Affidavit 9, British case ---------------------------------- 1104 Small, Asa W.; Affidavit 16, United States case.----...----...-------------- 3032 Small, Caleb : Affidavit 105, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3174 Small, James A. (Central Wharf Co.): Affidavit 84, United States case ---.. 3152 Smalley, Castanus W. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. -----...--. 2442–2448 Smalley, Charles E. : Affidavit 17, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3035 Smeltzer, John : Affidavit 135, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - e s e = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1258 Smith, Aaron : Affidavit 77, United States case.--------------------------- - 3144 Smith, Charles: Affidavit 84, British case ----------...--------------------- 1202 Smith, Edwin : Evidence on behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2262—2269 Smith, Joshua : Affidavit 268, British case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1403 Smith, Judah C. : Affidavit 283, British case ------------------------------ 1416 Smith, Nathaniel: Affidavit 146, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3220 Smith, Peter D. (Smith & Oakes): Affidavit No. 48, United States case. ---- 3111 Smith, Sylvanus: Affidavit 34, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - * a sº º ºs º is s tº me tº º sº tº 3095 (Smith & Galt): Affidavit 73, United States case. -- - - - - - 3139 Evidence on behalf of the United States. - - - - - - - - - - . .... 2534–2573 Smith, Thomas Charles : Affidavit 144, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - & 3.218 Smith, William, controller of customs, St. John, New Brunswick, extract from report of 1866 ---------------------------------------------------- 220 Smith, William B. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - --....... 1075–1086 Smith, William D. : Affidavit 254, British case . . ----...-------------------- 1388 Smyth, Christopher: Affidavit 130, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1251 Snellgrove, George T. R.: Affidavit 58, and statements of herring fishery in Fortune Bay, British case. --------------------------------------------- 1173 Snook, James P. : Affidavit 60, and statement, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1175 Snow, John W. : Affidavit 296, British case. ----. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1426 Somes, John E. (Clark and Somes): Affidavit 74, United States case. ... --. 3140 Spearwater, James W. : Affidavit 90, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1207 Speeches of counsel: (See Dana, Doutre, Foster, Thomson, Trescot, Weath- erbe, and Whiteway.) Staples, John : Affidavit 45, United States case.--------------------------. 3 106 Staples, John S. : Affidavit 275, United States case. ----. as it is º me sº º sº ºn º ºs º 3 tº º sº sº º 3342 Stapleton, Edward: Evidence on behalf of the United States.............. 1925–1945 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Stapleton, John : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. -- . . -- - - - - - - - - -...--. Statistics produced on behalf of the United States (Appendix Q): I. Statistical documents; fisheries and trade between the United States and British North America.-- - - - - - 1867–1877--------------------- and free, 1869–1877 - - - - - - - - - - - - 1868–1876 -------------------- . Mackerel and herring : Annual importation into the United States, 1872–1876 --------------------- . Mackerel and herring : Annual importation into the United States . Imports, fish of all kinds, 1845–1876 Mackerel and herring : quantity consumed in the United States, . Importations of fish into the United States from aii countries, 1869. 1876.--------------------------------------------------------- . Importations of fish and fish products from British North America, . Imports of fish from Canada and British North America, dutiable e tº º is ºs º * * * * * * * * * * * * * is sº º te º ºs º ºs tº sº sº tº gº * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * † tº ºs º º sº º º sº º º ºs ºs tº º gº tº as tº as º e º sº me tº sº, º sº º me from British North America, 1872–1877. ----. © º & sº tº sº dº sº º ſº º sº wºº tº º 'º º sº º 1848–1876.---------------------------------------------------- . Mackerel imports at Boston from British North America, 1845–1876. . Statement of duty saved on fish oils imported into the United States 6 7 8. Mackerel: Imports into United States from Brit 9 0 from British North America, 1874–1876. - - - - - - - - - - - - - --. * * * * * * * * 11. Imports of fish of all kinds at Boston from British North America, 1845–1876 --------------------- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * = * 12. Exports of fish oil from Boston to British North America, 1845–1876. 13. Exports of fish from the United States to British North America, 1867–1877 ----------------------------------------------------- 14. Exports of fish from the United States to the Dominion of Canada, and to other provinces of British North America, 1867–1877 - - - - - - 15. Gross product of the American fisheries except the whale, 1870–1876 16. Yield and value of the Canadian fi 17. Exports of fish from British North 18. Table showing statistics of the manufacture of menhaden oil and Sheries, 1870–1876 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - America, 1870–1875 - - - - - - - - - - - - - guano in the United States in the years 1873 to 1876. ---...-.... II. Numbers and tonnage of vessels of the United States employed in the cod and mackerel fisheries from 1866 to 1876, inclusive. - - - - - - - - - - III. Statistics prepared by Mr. George Brown Goode: 1. Products of marine fisheries of Southern Massachusetts and Rhode Island ------------------------ 2. Products of marine fisheries of the 3. Statements of imports of mackerel at Boston, January 1 to September 30, 1877 ------------------------------------------------------- IV. Statements taken from the books of Gloucester firms, produced by Mr. Babson, filed by Mr. Foster on October 24, 1877, and objected to by the British counsel as not being properly verified, and therefore inadmissible as evidence, but admitted by Commissioners for what it may be worth : David Lo W & Co.'s Statement. - - - - - - - D . Statement of Clark & Somes * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * = as º ºs sº gº º North Atlantic States. - - - - - - - - - - * * * * = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *e as sº- A. Leighton & Co.'s statement.--------------------------------- B. Peutengell & Cunningham's statement ----...----------...--...--- C. Statement of W. Parsons (2d) & Co - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - D. Statement of Alfred Mansfield ------------------------------. E. Statement of B. Maddocks.---------------------------...----. . F. Statement of D. C. & H. Babson.----...---------------...----, -- G. Statement of Perkins Brothers.-------------------...----...---- H. Statement of Hardy & Mackenzie. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I. Statement of William C. Wonson -------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---. J. Statement of George Sayward ------------...------------------ K. Statement of Daniel Sayward.--------------------------. ---. L. Statement of Frederick G. Wonson - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M. Statement of Samuel Haskell.----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - N. Statement of Smith & Oakes -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O. Statement of Samuel Lane & Bro. --------------------------- P. Statement of Shute & Merchant ---------------------------- Q. Statement of Walen & Allen . --------------------...----. ---- R. Statement of Dennis & Ayer. -------------------------------- S. Statement of Joseph O. Procter. ----------------------...----- T. Statement of James G. Tarr & Bro. --------. --...----...------ * * * * * * * * is sº e º s is sº ºn º ºs º ºs ºn as ºs s = e º sº gº tº sº º * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * g ºs ºs º ºs º sº as we sº º ºs º ºs s º ish North America, 335i-3358 3362, 335 3,355 3355 3.361 3363 3364 3365 3365 3365 3.366 3366 3366 3367 3367 3367 3368 3368 3368 3369 3369 3369 3370 3370 3370 3.371 3371 . 3371 3372 219 F 3490 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Page. Statistics produced on behalf of the United States (Appendix O). IV.-Statements taken from the books of Gloucester firms, &c.—Continued. V. Statement of Joseph Friend --------------------------------- 3372 W. Statement of George Norwood & Son -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3372, X. Statement of George Friend & Co ---...----. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3373 Y. Statement of Cunningham & Thompson.-- - - - - a tº tº º tº sº tº & tº tº s ºs º º º 3373 Z. Statement of George Dennis & Co -----------------. --------- 3:373 A. A. Statement of Rowe & Jordan.------------------------------- 3374 B B. Statement of Leonard Walen -------------------------------- 3374 C C. Statement of William S. Wonson - - - - - - - • * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3375 W. Statement of mackerel inspected at Portsmouth and Newcastle for the years 1869 to 1877, inclusive-----------------------------------. 3375 VI. Summary of the annual returns of the Inspector-General of Fish for the State of Maine, 1866–1873----------------------...----------- 3376 VII. Summary of returns of mackerel inspected in the State of Massa- chusetts, 1850–1876 -------------------------------------------- 3377–3380 Steele, George : Affidavit 33, United States case- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3094 Affidavit 57, United States case -----...----. -------------- 3121 Stewart, Charles : Affidavit 233, United States case - - - - - - - - - - *> º sº º us sº º sº e º 'º sº ºne so 3301 Stinson, Michael : Affidavit 135, United States case --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3208 St. John, N. B. : Address to the Queen from citizens of, January, 1853. ----. 1485 St. John’s, Newfoundland : Chamber of Commerce of, views on the reci- procity question, June 25, 1853 ----------------------------------------- 1488 St. Lawrence, Gulf of: Light-houses in . ----. - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1088 Strahan, Asberry : Affidavit 145, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.218 Stuart, Charles : Affidavit 168, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3241 Stuart, Daniel: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain -----. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 697, 698 Sullivan, Humphry. Affidavit 8 in rebuttal, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... 3448 Swain, David : Affidavit 318, British case -------------------------------. * * 1454 Sweet, William : Affidavit 122, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1241 SWett, Noah : Affidavit 13, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 3020 (Agent of Commercial Wharf Company of Wellfleet): Affida- Vit 95, United States case -------------------------------- 3164 Swim, Benjamin : Affidavit 242, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3309 T. Tapp, Mesiah : Affidavit 193, British case .-----------------------. -------- 1320, Tapp, Robert : Affidavit 207, British case --------------------------------- 1337 Tarr, David and James G. (James G. Tarr & Bro.): Affidavit 72, United States case ------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - 3138. Tarr, James G. : Affidavit 37, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3097 Tarr, Moses: Evidence on behalf of the United States - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2378–2.382 Tarr, Zebulon : Affidavit 278, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3344 Taylor, John F. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 817–827 Terrio, Simon. (See Theriot.) Terry, Russell D. : Affidavit 235, United States case.---- tº us as sº es us tº as º ºs º ºs º gº tº a º 3303 Testimony in rebuttal on behalf of Her Britannic Majesty’s Government : Examination of Mr. Henry Youle Hind.------------------------------- - 3339–3443 Testimony. (See Evidence and Witnesses.) Theriot (Terrio) Simon : Affidavit 182, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3254 Thomas, Jerome B. : Affidavit 77, United States case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3144 Thomas, Richard : Affidavit 124, British case -------------------. --------- - 1244 Thomes, C. D. (Thomes, Chase & Co.): Affidavit 119, United States case... 3190 Thompson, William (Cunningham & Thompson): Affidavit 58, United States case------------------------------- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 3122 Thomson, S. R. : Opening speech in behalf of Great Britain, July 31, 1877.. 1521 Argument against the right of final reply, August 28. 1877 ---------------------------------- vº º sº gº tº $ tº º ºn tº ſº. 1523, 1525, 1531 Argument in favor of awards for right of purchasing bait and transshipment, September 5 and 6, 1877... 1547, 1577, 1579, 1584 Final argument on behalf of Great Britain, November 19 and 20 ----------------------------------------------- 1777–1885 Thornhill, Philip : Affidavit 5 in rebuttal, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 3446 Three-mile line: Opinion of international jurists relative to, quoted - ... ---. 156–166 Thurlow, George D. : Affidavit 252, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3319 Thurston, Abram : Affidavit 299, British case -----------------...----------. 1428 Thurston, Winthrop : Affidavit 244, United States case ... ---...--------. - - - - 3311 Tierney, Joseph : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. ... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 957–963 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. 3491 E’age. Titcomb, W. P. (Treasury Department): Certificate and statement of num- g ber and tonnage of United States fishing fleet 1866 to 1876. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - 3359 Tolman, George : Affidavit 111, United States case ----...-----------------. 3180 Tory, James A. : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 864–876 Touzel, Philip : Affidavit 231, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------------- 1363 Tower, Abraham H. : Affidavit 100, United States case ----...----. -------- 3169 Townsend, Joseph : Affidavit 151. United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3226 Trachy, Edward : Affidavit 195, British case. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 1322 Transshipment of cargoes: Privilege of, not allowed as an element in the award.------------------------------------- 7, 40, 43, 44 British claim to pecuniary compensation - - - - - -. 172–173 Motion to exclude, as a basis of awards; debate thereon September 5 and 6, 1877 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1539–1588 Trask, Wallace : Affidavit 286, British case .-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1420 Treaty of Washington : Articles relating to the fisheries. ----...-------...--. 1, 83, 139 Extracts from instructions to Her Majesty’s High Commissioners--------------------------------- 238 Extracts from protocols of conferences - - - - - - - - - - - - 239 Tredick, C. Morris : Affidavit 109, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 31.78 Trefethen, C. & H. : Affidavit 121, United States case ---...--...----...----. 3.192 Trefethen, George (Portland, Me.): Affidavit No. 8, United States case. ---. 3001 (George Trefethen & Co.): Affidavit 117, United States CaS6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.187 Trefethen, George W. (Ireland & Trefethen): Affidavit 80, United States 98.8° - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.147 Tremain, Edward D. : Affidavit 276, British case.----------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1411. Trescot, William Henry : Motion in behalf of the United States respecting the right of final reply, and the debate thereon, August 28, 1877 ------------------------------ 1521—1538 Arguments in favor of right of final reply, August 28, 1877 ---------------------------------- 1524, 1535, 153 Argument against awards for right of purchasing bait, and transshipment, September 5 and 6, 1877 1547, 1566 Closing argument on behalf of the United States. 1629–1651 Trufant, Albert T. : Affidavit 6, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2994 Tucker, Daniel : Affidavit 99, British case ------, ------------------------, 1218 Tucker, George (George Dennis & Co.): Affidavit 52, United States case. . . 31.16 Tulk, William : Affidavit 97, and statement of vessels calling for ice and bait, British case----------------------------------------------------------- 1216 Tupper, Joseph J. : Affidavit 247, United States case .----...----...--------. 3313 Turner, Ezra : Evidence on behalf of United States - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2345–2362 |U. Union Wharf Company, of Provincetown, Mass.: Affidavit 83, United States 3151 C&Sè - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ss ºr s sº we as sº sº, s sº sº as sº as as sº * = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * TInited States: Answer to the case of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... ----. 119 Brief upon the question of the extent and limits of Canadian inshore fisheries ---------------------------------------- 139 . Upton, George A. (Leighton & Co.): Affidavit 71, United States case ... ---. 3137 W. Vardon, John : Affidavit 202, British case . . . . . . .----. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1330 Vattel, on the limits of maritime jurisdiction . -----------...---------...----- 162 Vavasseur, Hugh : Affidavit 65, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - s sº * * * * * * * * * g = * * * * ** 1180 Vessels: Revised schedule of, seized in 1870 for violations of Canadian laws. 150t) Foreign : List of, boarded within three miles of Prince Edward Island in 1872.------------------------------------------------ 15{}4 American fishing: List of, boarded by the Plover, July and August, 1870 ------------------------------- tº tº sº is ºs º gº sº gº ºn as sº as sº tº e s as ºr ºn tº º ºs º ºs º & 15{)1 United States fishing: List of, seen but not boarded in waters of Prince Edward Island in 1872. --------------------------------- 1508 United States, employed in cod and mackerel fisheries : Statement of, 1866 to 1876. ----...--. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3359 Belonging to Massachusetts: Employed in the mackerel fishery in 3380 ſº 185 Wibert, Philip : Evidence on behalf of Great Britain ---...----...----------. 446–462 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 34.92 ALPHABETICAL INDEX, W. Page. Wade, Edward : Affidavit 102, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ..... 1221 Walen, Leonard : Affidavit 66, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ** sº gº º 3131. Walen, Michael (of Walen & Allen): Affidavit 49, United States case ...... 3112 Walsh, Dexter F. : Evidence on behalf of the United States . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2458–2460 Walsh, Edward: Affidavit; 196, United States case --- . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3265 Walsh, Patrick : Affidavit 187, United States case - - - - -...--.. -- - - - - - - - - - -. 3257 Affidavit 216, United States case -----...---...----------. 3289 Walsh, Thomas: Affidavit 310, British case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 1445 Wampatuck, the : Judgment in the case of.----. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3383 Warren, Nicholas : Affidavit 39, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3100 Warren, Thomas: Evidence on behalf of the United. States - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2497–2506 Wasgatt, C. (C. Wasgatt & Co.): Affidavit 137, United States case. -----. 3210 Watts, William : Affidavit 267, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1401 Weatherbe, Mr. : Argument in favor of awards for right of purchasing bait, and transshipment, September 5 and 6, 1877.----..... 1558 Weaver, C. A. & Co.: Affidavit 139, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3212 Webb, Patrick: Affidavit 165, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.239 Webb, Seth and C. H. S. : Affidavit 44, United States case. --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3105 Weekes, D. F. : Affidavit 104, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3173 Wellesley, Vice-Admiral: Dispatch to the secretary of the admiralty, No- Vember 18, 1869 ------------------------------ 1492 Correspondence with Mr. Jackson, United States consul at Halifax, August and September, 1870. 1494, 1495 Wentzler, Benjamin : Affidavit.85, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1203 Wentzel, Martin : Affidavit 270, British case - - - - - , -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - • , = * * * * * * * 1405 Wentzel, William : Affidavit 149, British case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1273 West, Donald : Affidavit 160, British case -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1281 Whelen, Mauris (Morris): Affidavit 35, United States case. - - - - - - - --------- 3096 White Fawn, the : Judgment in the case of. - - - - - - - - - - - • ſº sº º sº as * tº ºn tº dº & tº º ſº *s ºr Nº & 3381 White, James F. : Affidavit 7, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * 1100 White, John : Affidavit 76, British case. ----...----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1190 White, John D. : Affidavit 3, British case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * = as as tº * * * * * * * * * * * * = & 1093 White, Thomas H. : Affidavit 237, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3305 Whiten (Whitten), O. B. : Affidavit 10, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 3009 Whitten, O. B. (Lewis, Whitten & Co.): Affidavit 114, United States case. 31.84 Whiteway, W. W. : Argument in favor of awards for right of purchasing bait, and transshipment, September 5 and 6, 1877 - ... -----. 1565 Final arguments on behalf of Great Britain, November 15, 1877 -------------------------------------------. 1705–1723. Whorf, Philip A. : Affidavit 91, United States case - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3160. Wilkins, Edward N. : Affidavit 274, United States case .----. . . . - - - - - - - - - -. 3341 Willard, Enoch G. : Affidavit 7, United States case. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2997 Affidavit 112, United States case ---. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3181 Willard, Henry E. : Affidavit 5, United States case ---, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2990 Willard, William H. (Lewis, Whitten & Co.): Affidavit 114, United States 4. CaS6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 318 Williams, A.T. (Union Wharf Company): Affidavit 83, United States case. 3151 Williams, Gilman S. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. --- - - - - - - - -. 2573–2590 Winser, Peter: Affidavit 78, British case.--------------...--------...----. 1.192 Winter, Thomas: Affidavit 66, British case.----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1181 Witnesses examined in behalf of the British Government: Their testimony: 1. Chivarie, Simon : Souris, Prince Edward Island.... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. 243. 2. Maclean, James: Souris, Prince Edward Island . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 281 3. Campion, John F. : Souris, Prince Edward Island. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 304 4. Campbell, Joseph : Souris, Prince Edward Island - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 331, 370 5. McNeill, William S. : Rustico, Prince Edward Island ... ---. . . . . . . . . . . 343. 6. Poirier, Stanislas F. : Tignish, Prince Edward Island - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 359 7. Howlan, George William : Cascumpecclue, P, ince Edward Island----- 374- 8. Harbour, George : Sandy Beach, Gaspé. ----------------------------- 394 9. Sinnett, William A. : Griffen’s Cove, Gaspé. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 404 10. Grenier, Grégoire: Newport, Gaspé.----. ... -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 411 11. McLeod, William : Port Daniel, Gaspé - - - - - - - - =º º sº, º is tº º ºs º ºs º ºs st sº m dº sº gº º me tº & 4.17 12. Vibert, Philip : Perce, Gaspé. ----------------------. ----------- * = * * * 446 13. Fox, John James: Amherst Harbor, Magdalen Islands.----...--. -- - - - 462 14. Mackenzie, George: New London, Prince Edward Island. - - - - - - - - - - - - 488 15; Bennett, Thomas R. : Harbor Grace, Newfoundland. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 502 16. Killigrew, William : St. John's, Newfoundland...... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 552 17. Fraser, James O. : St. John’s, Newfoundland - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 575, ALPHABETICAL INDEX. 18, Grant, Angus: Port Hawkesbury, Cape Breton - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19. McKay, James: Port Mulgrave, N. S.----- -------------------------- 20. Purcell, James: Port Mulgrave, N. S. ...-----------------. ------------ 21. Hardinge, Edward: British Navy----------------------------------- 22. Nicholson, John : Louisburg, Cape Breton.----------...-------------. 23. Maguire, John : Steep Creek, N. S.----------------------...---------- 24. Brown, William : Port Medway, N. S.--------------...---------------. 25. Bigelow, James W. : Wolfville, N. S.---. ----------------------------. 26. Stapleton, John : Port Hawkesbury, Cape Breton -----------. . . ----. 27. Wrayton, Michael : Barrington, N. S. ----------------------. ---. ---- 28. Stuart, Daniel: Halifax City. - - - - - - - - - - - - * º sº º sº tº & sº me tº gº tº as sº as sº e º sº sº tº º sº sº sº, sº 29. McLean, James: Letite, Charlotte County, N. B.. ----. --------- tº tº as is as 30. Lord, James: Deer Island, N. B. ----------------------------------- 31. McLaughlin, Walter B. : Grand Manan, N. B. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------ 32. Savage, Thomas: Cape Cove, Gaspé -------------------------------- 33. Baker, James: Cape Cove, Gaspé-----...---------------------------. 34. Jessop, James: Newport, Gaspé ------------------------------------ 35. Flynn, William : Percé, Gaspé.------------------------------- * * * * * 36. Couture, Joseph : Cape Despair, Gaspé -----------------------. ----. 37. Lamontaigne, T. J. : St. Anne des Monts, Quebec.------------------- 38. Short, John : Gaspé.----------------------------------------------- 39. Sirois, Josef O. : Grand Riviére, Gaspé. - - - - - - - - - -. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 40. Lebrun, Abraham : Percé, Gaspé ----------------------------------- 41. Roy, Louis : Cape Chatte, Gaspé ----------------------------------- 42. Taylor, John F. : Isaac's Harbor, Guysborough County, N. S. - - - - - - - - 43. Eisenhauer, James: Lunenburg, N. S ------------------------------ 44. Romeril, George : Percé, Gaspé.----------, ------------------------- 45. Macdonnell, William : Argyle, N. S.----------------...----. -- - - - - - - - 46. Holliday, John : Quebec City -------------------------- ----. we dº º ºs º º 47. Tory, James A. : Guysborough, N. S ------ - - - - - - - - - - - - . ** * * = tº ſº e º sº º tº gº tº 48. McDougal, Robert : Port Hood, Cape Breton - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 49. Fortin, Pierre: Quebec City.--------------------------------------- 50. Hickson, James: Bathurst, Gloucester, N. B -----------. --- - - - - - - - - - 51. Gardner, Enos : Tusket, Yarmouth County, N. S - - - - - - - - - - - - - tº tº º me sº sº is 52. Ross, William : Halifax City--------------------------------------- 53. Creed, Charles : Halifax City--------------------------------------- 54. Dillon, John : Steep Creek, Guysborough County, N. S. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - w 55. Paquet, Marshall: Souris, Prince Edward Island. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 56. McIsaac, Barnaby : East Point, Prince Edward Island..... - - - - - - - - - - 57. Tierney, Joseph : Souris, Prince Edward Island.----...-- - - - - - - - - - - * 58. McPhee, James: East Point, Prince Edward Island ---...----. -- - - - - 59. McDonald, John : East Point, Prince Edward Island.----. - - - - - - - - - - - 60. Pattillo, Thomas R. : Liverpool, N. S.----------------...----...------- 61. Macdonald, John R. : East Point, Prince Edward Island.-- - - - - - - - - - - 62. Macdonald, John D. : Souris, Prince Edward Island.----...----. g dº sº tº gº tº 63. Richardson, Peter S. : Chester, N. S. -----------...----...------------. 64. Nass, Charles E. : Chester, N. S.------------------------------------ 65. Yoning, Robert : Caraquette, N. B. ---------------------------------- 66. McDonald, Ronald : East Point, Prince Edward Island - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 67. Payson, Holland C. : Westport, N. S.---------------...----...----. ---... • 68. McIsaac, Clement : East Point, Prince Edward Island.----...--------- 69. Macdonald, Laughlin : Souris, Prince Edward Island.-- - - - - - - - - - - - -. 70. Beaton, Joseph : East Point, Prince Edward Island.... ---...--------- 71. McInnis, Jas. : Souris, Prince Edward Island---------...------------. 72. MacDonald, Alexander: Souris, Prince Edward Island ... ---. ... ----- 73. McLellan, John : Souris, Prince Edward Island - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---. - 74. Champion, Benjamin : Alberton, Prince Edward Island... ---...-- - - - - 75. Cunningham, John C.: Cape Sable Island, N. S.----. e tº e º sº gº dº º º sº º sº sº sº tº 76. Ruggles, B. H. : Brier Island, Westport, N. S.-----...----. --- - - - - - - - - - 77. Hopkins, Josiah : Harrington, N. S.--------------------------------- 78. Harrington, Wm. H. : Halifax City, N. S. - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 79. Purney, John : Sandy Point, N. S.--------------------------------. 80. Noble, Robert G. : Halifax City, N. S.----. ------------------------- 81. Barry, James: Ottawa.-------------------------------------------- 82. Smith, William B. : Cape Sable Island, N. S.--...-------------------. 83. Browne, Daniel M. : Halifax City, N. S.---------------------------- In rebuttal: Hind, Henry Youle: ----------------------------------------------- 756. 787 7.91 792. 797 802. 803 815 817 S27 838 843 856 864 876 882 901. 912 914 927 937 942. 950 957 963. 967 971 . 976. 986 995 1001 1006 1008 1014 1017 1019 1020 1021 1022. 1021 1023 1025 1036 1043 1046 1049. 1055 1065 1075 1086. 3398, 3494 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Page Witnesses examined on behalf of the United States; their testimony: 1. Bradley, James: Newburyport, Mass.... -- - - - - - - *º gº gº tº tº sº me tº º , as w = e º e = * * * * 1907 2. Stapleton, Edward : Gloucester, Mass.-------------...----. ------------ 1925 3. Cheney, S. F. : Grand Manan, N. B.--------------------------------- 1945 4. Ingersoll, David : Gloucester, Mass --------------------------------. 1959 5. Atwood, Nathaniel E. : Provincetown, Mass ----.ºf ſº º ºs as ºn ſº e º sº tº sº sº is sº ºne º ºs e º 'º 1981, 2047 6. Kemp, Barzilla : Wellfleet, Mass ------------------------------------ 2028 7. Freeman, Francis M. : Provincetown, Mass. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2049 8. Cook, Henry : Provincetown, Mass.------------...--------------------- 2066 9. Paine, Joshua : Provincetown, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2078 10. Freeman, Nathan D. : Provincetown, Mass -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2083 11. Ilewis, Bangs A. : Provincetown, Mass ------------------------------ 2087 12. Graham, James W. : Wellfleet, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2095 13. Newcomb, Daniel C. : Wellfleet, Mass ------------------------------- 2114 14. Pettingill, Moses: Newburyport, Mass. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * 2121 15. Young, Isaiah C. : Wellfleet, Mass.----...----------------. ------------- 2128 16. Daniels, Timothy A. : Wellfleet, Mass.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 21.31 17. Oliver, D. W. : Wellfleet, Mass.-------------------------------------- 2132 18. Friend, George : Gloucester, Mass.-----...--------------------------- 21.33 19. Orne, Charles H. : Gloucester, Mass ------...-------------------------- 2148 30. Maddocks, Benjamin : Gloucester, Mass -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2159 21. Leighton, Andrew : Gloucester, Mass.---------. --------------------- 2178 22. Riggs, Aaron : Gloucester, Mass.----...----. . * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2204 23. Rowe, John J. : Gloucester, Mass ----------------------------------- 2213 24. Gale, John H. : Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - tº º º sº tº nº ºn tº gº º ºs tº gº tº sº. 22:31 25. Evitt, John S. : Gloucester, Mass ---------. -------------------------- 2241 26. Cook, Benjamin F. : Gloucester, Mass-----...------------------------- 2252 27. Smith, Edwin : Gloucester, Mass------------------------------------ 2262 28. McInnis, John : Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * tº s º º & e º ºs ºs º gº tº dº º ºs º º ſº 2269 29. Procter, Joseph O. : Gloucester, Mass ------------------------------- 2275 30. Gardner, Sidney : Gloucester, Mass.--------------------------...------ 2312 31. Martin, Stephen J. : Gloucester, Mass.----...----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2316, 2344 32. Macaulay, Michael : Gloucester, Mass.------------...----------------- 2327 33. Turner, Ezra : Deer Island, Me--------...----------------------------- 2345 34. Rowe, Samuel T. : Gloucester, Mass.------- - - - - - - - ,------------- * * * * * 2362 35. Tarr, Moses: Gloucester, Mass.------------------------------------- 2378 36. Ashby, Benjamin : Noank, Conn ------------------------------------ 2.382 37. Brown, Joseph F. : Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .* * * * * 2390 38. Mills, Peter H. : Deer Island, Me. ----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2401, 39. McDonald, William H. : Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2404 40. Dickey, William A. : Belfast, Me. ----------------------------------- 241.1 41. Gray, Elvarado : Brooksville, Me-----...-----------. ---------------- 241.8 42. Hulbert, Robert H. : Gloucester, Mass.------------------------------- 2432, 2471. 43. Smalley, Castanus W. : Belfast, Me - - - - - - - - - - -... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2442 44. Googins, Edward A. : Portland, Me---------------------------------- 2448 45. Burgess, Isaac : Belfast, Me----------------------------------------- 2453 46. Brier, Charles H. : Belfast, Me -------------------------------------- 2456 47. Walsh, Dexter F. : Belfast, Me - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2458 48. Londrigan, Lawrence : St. Mary’s Bay, N. F--- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2460 49. Hopkins, Richard ; Belfast, Me.-----------------------...----------- 2461 50. Clark, George O. : Belfast, Me - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2469 51. Gurrie, James: Pictou, N, S ---------------------------------------- 2482 52. Perry, William : Sheet Harbour, N. S ------------------------------- 2493 53. Warren, Thomas: Deer Island, Me---------------------------------- 2497 54. Fisher, Wilford J. : Eastport, Me --------------------------. -------- 2506 .55. Lakeman, Joseph : Grand Manan, N. B. ----------------------------- 2527 56. Smith, Sylvanus : Gloucester, Mass --------------------------------- 2534 57. Williams, Gilman S. : Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - -----------. ---- 2573 58. Low, David W. : Gloucester, Mass -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - s sº s º a º º sº tº gº tº * * * 2590 59. French, Eliphalet W. : Eastport, Me -------------------------------- 2696 60. Davis, William : Gloucester, Mass.----...-- - - - - - - - - - - - ** * * * * * * * * *-ºº ſº tº º 2710 61. Cook, William O. : Gloucester, Mass.----...-----...------------------- 2711 62. Hill, Edward : Gloucester, Mass.... ... - - - - - - - - * tº gº º ºs º º ºs º sº as º º ºs º ºs as ºs º ºs º º º 2714 63. Conley, John, jr. : Rockport, Mass.---------------------------------- 2721 64. Knowlton, John C. : Rockport, Mass.--------------------. ---- sº º gº tº $º sº tº 2729 65. Myrick, James H. : Boston, Mass.-----------------...---------------- 2740 66. Nelson, Chresten: Gloucester, Mass ----------, --------, ---...--------- 2765 67. Patillo, James W. : North Stoughton, Mass. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2777 68. Baird, Spencer F. : Washington D. C. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --. 2795, 2821 ALPHABETICAL INDEX, 3495 Page. Witnesses examined on behalf of the United States.—Continued.. 69. Mass, William J. : Chester, N. S.----------------------------------- 2816. 70. Churchill, Howard M. : Rustico, P. E. I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2849 71. Hall, Isaac C. : Charlottetown, P. E. I., and Winthrop, Mass - - - - - - - - - 2854 72. Falt, Walter M. : Gloucester, Mass. - - - - - ---------------------------- 2871 73. Pew, Charles H. : Gloucester, Mass ------------. -------------------- 2879 74. Plumer, George W. : Gloucester, Mass ------------------------------ 2907 75. Pettes, James A. : Grand Manan ----------------...------------------ 2920 76. Rowe, Joseph : Gloucester, Mass------------------------------------ 2931 77. Wonson, Roger W. : Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2943 78. Babson, Fitz J. : Gloucester, Mass - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2956 Wanson, Frederick G. (John F. Wanson & Co.): Affidavit 30, United States 08 C886 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3088 Wanson, John F., Frederic G., Roger W.; and Franklin A. (John F. Wanson & Co.): Affidavit 75, United States case. --------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3242 Wanson, J. Warren : Affidavit 256, United States case .----...-- - - - - - - - - - - - - 3320 Wanson, Roger W. : Evidence on behalf of the United States. -- - - - - - - - - - - - 2943–2956 Wanson, William C. : Affidavit 27, United States case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3077 Affidavit 60, United States case. ----------. --- - - - - - - - 3125 Wanson, W. S. and S. G., jr. (Wanson Brothers): Affidavit 64, United States CàS6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3129 Wrayton, Michael: Evidence in behalf of Great Britain - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 692–696 Wyse, William : Affidavit 199, British case.----...----------...----. -------- 1326 Y. Young, Isaiah C.: Evidence on behalf of the United States.----...-- - - - - - - - 2128–21.31 Young, Nathan, (Central Wharf Co.): Affidavit 84, United States case. - - - - - 3152 Young, Hon. Robert: Evidence on behalf of Great Britain. ----. . . - - - - - - - - - 1006–1008 Young, Stephen (agent of Central Wharf Co., of Wellfleet): Affidavit 94, United States case---------------------------------------------- 3.162 Young, Sir Wm. : Judgment of, in the case of the Wampatuck - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3383 In the case of the A. H. Wanson.----------------------. & 3388 In the case of the A. J. Franklin - - - - - - -----------...----- 3391 In the case of the J. H. Nickerson -----...----...--------- 3.395 Z. Zwicker, William N. : Affidavit 91, British case.--...----. . . . ... ... --------. 1208 O Aft _M 2. }. l G } 6 | |I|| 70 3071 8 ºl §§ \，\！ §§ }）;§§ ſº： *:::::::: **** -$（''）; -----jğËſ: 4·!!3.ſ įſtae #||* -§§§:ſſ; **�; †{#· º √· : ſſſſſſſſſſºn:-|- ################ {{!••#### ** #: iſis * ############# §§∞ √∞∞∞ §§§ſººſ: №!,5）- §§§Èțţ -(º， §§ § ſºſ º sº § Jº *†: *::Flſº º # ſae ∞ º: ! 'ſ * * -aeºle - ， ， ， vº, ºſ，ºs * * * ~ * 3 * tº sº ∞ √° √∞ ∞ ， ！ ſº • ！ : ſiſi: º： ∞i w < 8， saeſ.įº. ſººſ};## №. ！ ！ ！ ſſ ≡.،·-·-· ſ،-· ·m ●ºſſ， ae，·^* ſąſ.· -~ ·- ！ 4ſaes *，· ·-！ -،· ·w. ∞1. -：ºw? ！ ·№ſ a ...）· ·：·，-…º ：··• -·- ·， ！ ！ #######