SEA COAST FISHERIES (IRELAND) BILL. (Hansard, 25 July 1866)

§ MR. BLAKE,
in moving the second reading of the Bill, said, that as the Session was then so far advanced, and there were some portions of the Bill which might involve controversy, especially those clauses removing nearly all restrictions on trawl-fishing—thus assimilating the Irish to the English fishery law—he would not 1459 ask the House to consent to pass the Bill in its entirety. There were thirty-four clauses altogether in the Bill, every one of which he believed to be desirable, but he was willing for this Session to give them all up except two, the 3rd and 29th clauses. If even these were passed, he believed they would, if properly carried out, not only arrest the fearful decline that was going on in the fisheries, but also give a stimulus to that branch of industry calculated to raise it to the position it ought to occupy. The third clause proposed to combine the sea coast with the inland fisheries under one administration, making it as much an independent department as any other. The 29th clause proposed to extend the provisions of the 10 Vict. to the Act which would enable the Commissioners of Public Works to advance loans for the cultivation of oysters, the building of piers, and also for the building and repairing of fishing vessels and boats, and the purchase of fishing gear, &c., on satisfactory security being given for the repayment. In order to show the utility of passing these clauses he would lay before the House a brief statement of the actual condition of the fisheries, and the manner in which they had declined for the last twenty years. He would quote from the Report of the Royal Commissioners appointed to inquire into the fisheries of the United Kingdom. They stated that there was a great falling off in the number of boats and men employed along the coast. In the year 1830 there were 13,119 vessels of all classes, and 64,771 men and boys employed in the trade. In 1836, when the stimulus of bounties or loan funds was withdrawn, the number of vessels fell to 10,761, and the men and boys to 54,119. In 1845, immediately before the famine, the number of vessels was 19,888, and the men and boys 93,073; in 1848 (after the famine), the number of vessels fell to 16,932, and the men and boys to 70,111, whilst last year the number of vessels was but 9,300, and the hands had fallen to 40,946. This showed a diminution within the last twenty years of 10,583 boats and of 52,127 men. The Commissioners added that the numbers given for 1864, reduced as they were, still appeared to be large as compared with the produce of the fisheries indicated by the railway returns and the supplies in the principal markets. The Commissioners recommend that all Acts of Parliament which profess to regulate or restrict the 1460 modes of fishing pursued in the open sea should be repealed, and that unrestricted freedom of fishing be permitted hereafter. The Report of the Royal Commissioners was brought down to 1864, and detailed the state of things up to 1865. The Report from the Irish Fisheries Commissioners just issued enabled him by a little calculation to ascertain the exact state of the fisheries up to the present moment. That Report, he was pained to say, exhibited even a sadder picture than the preceding account, as it appeared from it that in 1865, as compared with 1864, there had been a decrease in the year of 311 fishing vessels and boats, and 3,026 men and boys. The numbers now stand 8,989 vessels of all classes, and 37,920 men and boys, as against 19,883 vessels and 93,073 men and boys in 1845, so that in round numbers the vessels and boats had decreased to one-half, and there was only one-third of the men and boys left. In addition to deaths from famine and emigration having caused such a decrease in those following fishing pursuits, another great reason was the increased poverty of the people preventing them not only from buying new boats and gear, but even from keeping the old ones in repair, and in consequence many a stalwart fellow willing and able to fish had to abandon the calling. He had seen hundreds of instances of this around various parts of the coast, and had no doubt, if enabled to do so, thousands would be found to follow the avocation with advantage to themselves and the country. He did not advocate, or even wish, that anything should be given to them as a gift, but that they should give satisfactory security, and be made to repay every shilling. He believed at the time Government advanced loans to fishermen, they were in the end repayed within a few hundred pounds of what they had advanced. There was a society in Dublin established he believed by the excellent Society of Friends for assisting poor fishermen. They had only £;2,000 or £3,000 at their disposal, the residue of some charitable fund. It was generally nearly all lent out, did a vast deal of good as far as it went, and he heard a short time ago from the Secretary, that they hardly ever made a bad debt. As the House was aware, great improvements had lately taken place in the cultivation of oysters. Twenty times as much could be produced in Ireland as at present. To encourage their cultivation he proposed to allow the 10 Vict. to be ex- 1461 tended, so as to enable persons entitled to borrow money for the improvement of their land, to obtain loans for oyster culture. By giving security they could now get advances for drainage, subsoiling, trenching, &c.; irrigation, embankments from sea or river, enclosing and fencing, reclamation of waste lands, farm roads, clearing lands, farm buildings, scutch mills, labourers' dwellings. Why should they not be allowed to carry on their improvements below high-water mark, and plant oyster beds on giving the same security for re-payment? The return would be likely to be larger than from any other kind of outlay. In a report of a lecture on the Irish Fisheries, by Mr. J. Hoare, which appeared in a leading journal (The Irish Times), he saw that a gentleman purchased a tract of land adjoining the sea for £100. During ten years he expended from £10 to £15 a year on it in cultivating oysters, and he sold it lately for £24,000. As he had already stated, he was of opinion that it would be desirable to separate the Fishery Department from the Board of Works. He wished to speak of the Board of Works with the greatest respect; but he thought they had as much work on their hands as they could manage without being burdened with the fisheries. The Inspecting Commissioner of Fisheries, Mr. Barry, speaking of the Board, said— The truth is their hands were so full that it was with extreme difficulty that those engaged in the Irish sea fisheries could obtain their co-operation. The Royal Commissioners, in speaking of the Board, remark— The fisheries of Ireland are also legally under the control of a Board, which possesses almost unlimited powers; but it is the practice of the Board to exert their powers as little as possible, and only under pressure from without. In conclusion, he hoped the noble Lord representing the Irish Government (Lord Naas) would take the suggestion he had offered into immediate consideration, and if he would not consent to allow the two clauses to pass which he wanted, then it was to be hoped before the close of the Session he would introduce some measure himself to arrest if possible the further decay of their fisheries. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had on a late occasion spoken some encouraging words with regard to Ireland, and left it to be inferred that his Government would do their best to stay emigration by endeavouring to develop the industrial resources of the 1462 country. He believed it would be impossible for him to select a more hopeful field for exertion in that way than in promoting the fisheries, or one likely to yield more immediate, larger and permanent results, and involving less risk and trouble. To no one more than to the present Chief Secretary for Ireland was credit due for the passing of the Inland Fisheries Act of three years since, and which had been already productive of so much advantage. The improvement of the sea fisheries was an object of far greater importance, and he trusted the noble Lord would use the influence with which his high position invested him, by an earnest endeavour to place this great national resource in the prosperous position it might be made to occupy.

§ GENERAL DUNNE
said, he hoped the noble Lord the Chief Secretary for Ireland would not interfere and alter the present regulations with reference to trawlers. The Government were in a difficult position relative to that subject, there being two Reports—that of the Royal Commissioners, and that of the Board of Works—which were diametrically opposed to each other, and it would therefore be necessary for the Government to use great caution in dealing with them. The proposed transference of the control of the fisheries from the Board of Works, he thought, would be advantageous, and anything that would develop the resources of the oyster fisheries would be beneficial. No branch of industry could be more beneficial aided by loans than the Irish sea fisheries, and he believed that they would be fully repaid and that the Exchequer would suffer no loss.

§ MR. MONSELL
said, he entirely approved of the removal of the superintendence of fisheries in Ireland from the Board of Works; but he thought that it would be unwise at this late period of the Session to legislate upon the subject. Negotiations were now going on between England and France for the regulation of sea fisheries, and when those negotiations had resulted in a convention it would be necessary that there should be some general legislation upon the subject, under which he trusted that the Irish fisheries would be placed under the same regulations as those of England and Scotland, and that the 1463 fishermen would be taught to rely upon their own exertions, and not upon any system of protection.

LORD NAAS
said, that no man was more qualified than the hon. Member for Waterford (Mr. Blake) to speak on a subject to which he had for many years devoted his attention. He had sat with the hon. Member upon more than one Committee which had derived considerable advantage from his knowledge of the subject. He must say he thought that the hon. Gentleman had exercised a proper discretion in not going on with the Bill, seeing that it contained many important enactments on which a great diversity of opinion existed, and which the House could not accept without very careful and ample deliberation. The hon. Gentleman himself proposed to press two clauses only. The first of these related to the control of the Irish fisheries, which it proposed to withdraw from the Board of Works, and transferred to a separate Commission. He (Lord Naas) had never concealed his opinion that the whole constitution of the Fishery Commission was very defective. It was a mere offset from the Board of Works, which was wholly independent of the Irish Government and under the control of the Treasury. If the Fishery Commission were to be remodelled, it would be better to place it under the Irish Executive; but he did not think that it would be wise to come to any decision as to the body to whom their direction should be intrusted until the Royal Commission, which he believed would conclude its labours in a week or two, had made its Report. More than that, it would, as the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Limerick (Mr. Monsell) had pointed out, soon become necessary for the Government to take into consideration the whole question of the fisheries of the United Kingdom; and he thought that it would be better to leave this matter of the management of the fisheries of Ireland to be dealt with by a general measure, than to make it the subject of special legislation. His own individual opinion was that a very large alteration in the constitution of the Irish Fishery Commission ought to be made. The hon. Gentleman proposed in the 29th clause to make loans for many objects connected with the Irish fisheries—for making oyster-beds, for the building of piers, dredging of harbours, erection of curing houses, the repairing of boats, and the purchase of fishing gear. It was ques- 1464 tionable whether industrial undertakings of the latter character were benefited by a system of loans. The hon. Gentleman's proposal seemed to partake of the old system of bounties which had been found to be injurious to every system to which it had been applied. He doubted whether the purchase of implements and the repair of boats for carrying on the fishing would be beneficial to the fishery interest itself, or would be favourably considered by the House of Commons. For these reasons he was afraid he could not promise the hon. Gentleman to take up these clauses. The Government, however, were fully aware of the immense importance of this question. Among the undeveloped resources of Ireland there were none greater or more important than the fisheries, not only because of the stores of cheap and wholesome food which might thus be gained for the use of the people, but because of the amount of employment thus provided for the fishermen, from which body the Royal Navy and the mercantile marine were largely recruited. Attempts were made to establish elementary schools to teach navigation, and the Government would do what it could to make them more useful to the people. The late Government had introduced a Bill on the subject of the oyster fishery, which had gone up to the other House of Parliament, and which was intended to cure a defect in the law, and he had already given notice of his intention to introduce a Bill on the subject of licences for oyster beds. He agreed that legislation on this subject next Session was absolutely necessary. There was an enormous amount of valuable information at the disposal of the Government, so that they would be in a condition to take up the question at a very early period.