SUPPLY.— [28TH JULY.] (Hansard, 5 August 1879)

§ MAJOR O'BEIRNE
said, there was one item in this Vote which he objected to—the salary of the Inspector of Fisheries in the Northern District of Ireland. He desired to call attention to the action of the Fisheries Inspector (Mr. Brady) in regard to a small place in his district. Previous to its being placed under his supervision, it was a very common thing for the fishermen of the locality to take as many as 400 salmon in the river. By following a misleading notice, issued in November, 1871, the Inspector had been enabled to place this river under his bye-laws; and, in consequence of these laws, the salmon 286 fishery had been almost completely destroyed in the river and in Loch Fyne. Then the right of taking fish had been granted to a Mr. Markham, although he had never enjoyed the right of using nets there before 1862. If anybody had suspected that this was to have been given to him, a mass of evidence could have been brought forward to show that he had not that right of fishery, and the lessees would also have been called upon to prove their right. The people in the district, however, were entirely misled by the notices issued by Mr. Brady, and he ought to be called upon to explain what he had done. He should like to call attention, also, to the manner in which Mr. Brady had altered the bye-laws of the district. He had made the time for fishing in the Sligo River—10 miles off—commence in March; while in this Drowse River he put the time of fishing on the 1st of February, so as to give Mr. Markham the preference in getting his fish into the market. He found, also, by looking into the Reports of the Fishery Inspectors, that these fixed draft nets were not allowed in any district except Mr. Brady's district. All these things, he thought, demanded an impartial inquiry, and he would move the reduction of the Vote by the amount of the salary of the Inspector.

§ SIR JOSEPH M'KENNA
sincerely hoped the House would not accept the proposition; because if there was on the Fishery Board one man who had done more than any other to preserve the Irish Fisheries, and to keep the profit of them to the poorer classes, he ventured to say that Mr. Brady was the man. If the House had paid attention to what his hon. and gallant Friend had said, he thought they would speedily come to the conclusion that there was an inquiry wanted as to the circumstances of those waters to which different periods of close time were assigned; but granting all that he would ask whether the salary of one of their Inspectors was to be stopped in order that a private right of Mr. Markham's should be tried? He hoped the House would not think of entertaining this proposition. 287 He could testify, from a long knowledge of Mr. Brady and his district, that a more safe and efficient officer did not exist in any Department of the Government.

§ MR. J. LOWTHER
quite agreed that it would not be at all expedient to take a strong measure like stopping the salary of the Inspector of Fisheries. He had no doubt the course adopted was quite proper, and in accordance with the Act of Parliament. At the same time, the hon. and gallant Gentleman had put forward some complaints from persons interested in property in the neighbourhood in regard to some of the bye-laws issued. He knew from experience in England that river authorities and Conservancy Boards were capable of becoming a standing nuisance in their neighbourhood, unless some attention was paid to them; and, therefore, the hon. and gallant Gentleman was quite justified in calling attention to the subject. He thanked him for the manner in which he had done so, and promised to make inquiries to see whether any change was required.