expect to earn his living, and pay his mate's share, out of a boat and gear costing, perhaps, 100l. In no other trade (except that of living on one's wits) will so small a capital investment produce so much livelihood; for, though the earnings be small, in no other trade are what may be called the man-earnings-the joint earnings of capital plus labour-relatively so great.

There, in part, lies their surprising toughness against adverse modern conditions, and also their economic strength, provided they can so be reorganised that a due proportion of the worth of the catches shall go to the fishermen themselves. It may also be pointed out that, since the upkeep of a small fishing boat and gear costs little, the larger proportion of its earnings are spent by the crew in their own locality; whereas in lodging-houses and shops the larger proportion of the gross earnings goes to landlord and wholesaler. Hence, turnover for turnover, the relatively high value of a fishery to its own locality; it brings so much of its earnings in, and sends so little out. I do not, however, mean to convey that the inshore fisheries are in a profitable or flourishing condition. Far from it. If fishing is, economically speaking, nearly all profit, it does not follow that the profits, in practice, are as great as they might be, or that it is the fisherman who secures his proper share of them. What I do wish to make plain is, first, that there are sound economic reasons for reviving the inshore fisheries, and secondly, that they are capable of revival, inasmuch as their economic advantages are fundamental, and cannot be taken away, while their commercial disabilities are incidental and remediable.

Motors represent a compromise. They increase the capital cost of fishing and also running expenses. On the other hand, that increase is not great-not so great, for example, as to necessitate shore ownership of boats. Motors enable fishermen to get to the fishing grounds quicker, to fish in calms, to catch markets and fish trains better; and by saving time and labour they enable more fishing, or more sorts of fishing, to be done. The complaint of the youngsters against fishing is, that the earnings do not balance the hardships; were the earnings better, they would put up with the hardships readily enough. By increasing the earnings, and by decreasing

Please supply me regularly with the QUARTERLY REVIEW, post free,
published by John Murray, for which I enclose..

24s., being

the excessive labour, especially in getting to the grounds and in hauling aboard drift-nets and long lines, as well as by adding a mechanical interest which appeals to youth, motors undoubtedly attract young men to the work. Where they have come into use, the fishermen say they would rather lose their boat than their engine. The process of conversion is always the same. At first, motors are regarded as useless, at least for the particular fishery in question; then one or two men try them, often none too successfully; more men try; the technique of motors for the particular fishery is mastered; and soon the best men have them. Finally crews for non-motor boats become hard to get, and in a wonderfully short time the whole fleet is converted to motor power. It is mainly the coming of the marine motor which makes the present seem a specially favourable time for initiating a revival of the inshore fisheries.

Not, of course, that motors are everything, or even the one thing needful. Many other matters urgently need tackling if the decline is to be changed to development. It must be acknowledged that fisheries are a rather distressful, not to say squabblesome, industry. In lucky periods they are apt to undergo an expansion which leads to distress during lean years. One sort of fishing, especially trawling, interferes with other sorts. And the controversy as to how far the fishing grounds are being depleted, who or what is responsible for the depletion, and how to prevent it, has always been very keen. Besides scores of questions in the House, fisheries have been the subject of a good many Government Inquiries, and of several Bills and Acts. Since the Devon and Cornwall Inquiry of 1912-13 and the Departmental Committee of 1913-14 covered the whole of the English and Welsh coast, previous Inquiries need not here be dealt with, except to remark that the important recommendations of the Departmental Committee in respect of undersized fish, simplification of by-laws, and shell-fish culture were anticipated by the House of Lords Committee of 1904 and even the Commissioners of 1866. The latter, among whom was Huxley, remarked:

'Should it [depletion of the fishing grounds] ever be satisfactorily proved to have arisen, we conceive that the best

remedial measure would be to place a restriction upon the size of the fish permitted to be brought ashore, and to subject the possessor of fish below a certain specified size to penalties; but to avoid interfering with the implements of fishermen, or with their methods of fishing. For the present we advise that all Acts of Parliament which profess to regulate or restrict the modes of fishing pursued in-shore be repealed....'

How little that advice was taken by a generation of prohibitory persons, and with what bad results, the Report of the Departmental Committee shows.

Fisheries have been the ugly duckling, the kicked dogfish, of Whitehall. Formerly attended to by Salmon Inspectors of the Home Office, they were transferred, in 1886, to a Fisheries Department of the Board of Trade. In 1898 a joint Fisheries and Harbour Department of the Board of Trade was formed; but in 1903 the fisheries were again transferred, becoming a division of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, but leaving fishery harbours behind them with the Harbour Department of the Board of Trade. The Departmental Committee left no doubt in its Report of its opinion that the Central Department is still inadequately equipped-in status, funds, staff and empowering legislation-for dealing with the large and complex fishery interests under its charge.

Locally, the fisheries are administered, within the eleven districts into which the coast is at present divided, by Sea Fisheries Committees, formed under the Sea Fisheries Regulation Act of 1888, and in certain estuaries by local bodies having Sea Fisheries powers. Such Committees are made up of two classes of members: (1) those appointed by local authorities contributing funds, and (2) fishery members. The latter, in turn, consist of a representative from each Salmon Board within the District, and of fishery members proper, appointed by the Central Department to represent the fishing interests of the District. As there is no power to pay the expenses, let alone for the loss of time, of fishermen members, men willing to accept appointment are difficult to find, and it is still more difficult for them to attend regularly. In consequence, fishermen are either unrepresented, or are represented by outsiders interested and