THE MARQUESS OF HUNTLYasked the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether it would be possible to obtain returns of the number and valuation of the Scotch coast and river salmon fisheries; and, if so, whether instructions would be sent to the Scotch Fishery Board in accordance with the 5th section of the Fishery Board Act, 1882, to procure and include these returns and valuations in their annual report to be presented to Parliament; and when the report would be presented? The noble Lord said, there were certain districts which were not under the District Salmon Fishery Boards; but he believed that that difficulty would be obviated if the Home Department sent instructions to the Fishery Boards to get the valuations 1838 from the assessors in each county in Scotland. If the complete Report could not be obtained this year, he hoped the Under Secretary would be able to state when it was likely to be ready. He thought it was most important in dealing with questions connected with salmon fisheries that the most complete information should be given to Parliament.
THE EARL OF ROSEBERYsaid, he could answer the Question of which the noble Marquess had given Notice, but he could not answer the Question of which the noble Marquess had not given Notice. On seeing this Question on the Paper, he wrote to the Secretary of the Fishery Board in Scotland, who informed him that the returns of the number and valuation of the Scottish coast and river salmon fisheries could only be obtained in those fishery districts where there were District Boards, but that it would be impossible, or nearly so, to obtain them were there were no Fishery Boards. There were three-fourths of the fishery districts in Scotland without Boards. The Secretary added that it would be very desirable to procure these returns, and that they would be given this year, but only to a certain extent, as the rivers on the East coast alone had as yet been inspected, and a Report thereon was in preparation. He was unable to answer the Question of the noble Marquess as to when the Report would be presented.
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, he should like to be quite certain as to what the noble Lord understood by the word "valuation." He did not think there was anything in the 5th section of the Fishery Board Act that had to do with valuation.
THE EARL OF ROSEBERYreplied, that he took it for granted that the secretary of the Fishery Board, on whose authority he relied, meant the rental of these Scottish fisheries; but he spoke under correction.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, it was an unusual proceeding to go behind a valuation roll, which was the basis for rating, and was open to everyone. To give returns of the annual rental of private property was entirely without precedent. If these were granted it would be found that questions of a very inconvenient character would follow.
THE EARL OF ROSEBERYsaid, there could be no difficulty in giving the returns from the valuation roll. The difficulty, he thought, was in ascertaining the rental.
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, he did not think that the noble Earl had quite apprehended the point. It was whether the information which was to be given in accordance with the 6th section of the Fishery Board Act was the valuation according to the valuation roll? That, of course, was a public document. If it was meant that inquiry was to be made into the rental and value of the different fisheries in Scotland, then it struck him that that would be a most inquisitorial proceeding, and one to which he should certainly object if any application was made to him.
THE MARQUESS OF HUNTLYwas understood to say that he only wanted the returns from the valuation rolls.