exceeding sixty days (without prejudice to ordinary diligence where no imprisonment follows a conviction), coupled also with forfeiture of the net.

In 1891, another Act-the Fisheries Act, 1891 was passed, for carrying into effect an international declaration made by the British and Belgian Governments for the settlement of differences between their fishermen, and reducing as much as possible the injuries they may sustain from the fouling of their fishing-gear.

In three successive sessions, 1890, 1891, and 1892, the Unionist Government endeavoured to deal with the question of the reconstitution of the Fishery Board. Their measures passed through the House of Lords, but owing to Radical obstruction and the pressure of business, could not be got through the House of Commons. By the Bill of 1892, it was proposed to constitute five fishery districts in Scotland, each of which was to return one member to the Central Fishery Board, which was to consist of ten members. Power was to be given to the District Committees to form sub-committees, and for the acquisition under the Lands' Clauses Act and the administration of mussel-beds, and provision was to be made for the voting by Parliament of the sums necessary to defray the expenses. This grant was fixed at £1000 for 1893, and for each year thereafter was to be such sum as the Secretary for Scotland should determine with consent of the Treasury. It was unlimited in amount, and could be increased to meet the needs of the industry. The personal and travelling expenses of the members of the Fishery Board were to be defrayed from moneys to be voted by Parliament. Other sums required, being merely the expenses of management of the District Fishery Committees, were to be raised by the local authorities as part of the general purposes rate. But no power

was given to rate the inland farmer or crofter to find bait for the coast fisherman. The assistance given to him was to be paid for by the nation as a whole. A resolution was moved in the House of Commons, on 8th March 1892, by Mr. Marjoribanks, "That a large representative element should be introduced into the Scottish Fishery Boards; that a sufficient number of District Fishery Commissioners should be instituted to take charge of local fishery interests on the coasts of Scotland; that proof should be required of the titles under which Scottish mussel scalps are claimed and held; that power should be given to District Fishery Committees in Scotland to regulate, acquire, and work mussel scalps within their several districts; and that the regulations from time to time made in the interests of the various classes of fishermen working in Scottish seas should be enforced by an effective system of sea police."

1 54 & 55 Vict. c. 37.

Mr. Anstruther (L.U.) had moved the addition of an amendment providing that powers should be granted by the Commissioners of Woods and Forests to the District Fishery Committees to issue licences to fishermen to fish for salmon in suitable parts of the coast of Scotland.

Mr. A. Balfour, on behalf of the Government, accepted both the motion and the amendment, and explained that the Secretary for Scotland had in draft, ready for presentation to the House whenever there was a reasonable prospect of its being dealt with, a Bill covering the points named in the motion, and dealing even more effectively with the question of mussel-beds, for it proposed to give the Government the power of compulsory purchase under the provisions of the Lands' Clauses Acts.

The Bill then promised, of which the leading provisions have been mentioned, having passed the Lords, came on for second reading in the House of Commons on 21st June 1892, when it was objected to by Dr. Clark. Mr. Balfour made a strong appeal that it should be allowed to proceed, saying-" In every statement I have made in regard to public business, I have mentioned this Fishery Board Bill for Scotland as one of those we greatly desired to pass, and which we had every reason to hope would not meet with serious opposition. . . . The responsibility of preventing the carrying out of these beneficent arrangements in favour of the fishermen of Scotland-not the least deserving class in Scotland-must rest with the honourable member for Caithness and the honourable member for Berwickshire."

Dr. Clark moved a motion for its rejection which stood in the name of Mr. Marjoribanks, the Gladstonian whip, who was absent fighting his own constituency. A division was forced, but the second reading was carried by 59 votes to 27, as was a resolution authorising the payment of the expenses of the local Sea Fishery Boards. Dr. Clark was assisted as teller by Mr. Stephen Williamson, and Mr. Bolton, Mr. Bryce, Dr. Farquharson, and Sir John Kinloch also voted against the Bill. Bill was put down for Committee on the following night, but was at once objected to by Dr. Hunter, the member for North Aberdeen, and Dr. Clark, who threatened so many amendments that it was quite impossible to carry the Bill further at so late a period of the session, and it had to be withdrawn. With a "light heart" Dr. Clark "accepted the responsibility of killing the Bill."

The

The measure which was introduced by Mr. Gladstone's Government in 1893 gave, in its original form, a less efficient Fishery Board, stereotyped for all time the money to be voted by Parliament at substantially the sum available in 1892, which is notoriously insufficient, and threw what might be a

heavy burden on the agricultural ratepayers of parishes which have a seaboard. To some extent improved, owing to representations made, it owed its passage through the House of Commons, as Sir George Trevelyan acknowledged, to the "wonderful forbearance" of the Scottish Unionist members; but it was avowedly so imperfect that the Minister in charge put down enough amendments to fill a column of the Scotsman when it came on in the House of Lords. That House struck out the rating clause, against which the Town Councils of Aberdeen, Dundee, Leith, and Greenock, and the County Councils of Aberdeenshire and nearly every other county affected had protested, and otherwise amended but passed the Bill. (For further details as to this Bill see Chapter XVII.)

These Acts and endeavours show that Conservative statesmen are ready to give to the claims of fishermen the same patient consideration which has produced such great results for factory workers, miners, and others engaged in different branches of industry. But the Unionist Government did much more. By judicious grants of public money to assist in providing harbours and opening up communication with the southern markets, it did much to develop the fishing resources of our Highland coasts; and by the great measure of 1888,1 dealing with the large question of railway rates, it gave to fishermen and others full opportunity for ventilating any grievances they may have before those who have power to deal with them, and for securing full facilities for the carriage to market of the produce of their industry. The following is a note of what was done in the matter of harbours and piers alone:

Ness Harbour, Island of Lewis.-Grant of £16,500 towards its completion. This provides a harbour of refuge at the north end of the Lewis, and enables the Lifeboat Institution to place a lifeboat there.

Carloway, Island of Lewis.-Grant of £2000 for a pier. This materially assists the development of the fishing on the west coast of the Lewis, Carloway being the centre for this, and having already natural shelter for its harbour. The pier will also render the landing and despatch of fish much more expeditious. Gott Bay, Tiree.-Grant of £800o towards erection of pier and breakwater. There was no shelter for the fishermen in Tiree. The pier and breakwater will shelter a large area of deep water, and so help to develop both the fishing and the agricultural and other interests of the island.

Talmin Bay, Sutherlandshire.-Grant of £3500 for pier and breakwater.

1 51 & 52 Vict. c. 25.

Uig, Skye.-Grant of £4000 for steamboat pier.

Skerray, Sutherlandshire.-Grant of £3000 for boat harbour. Portskerra, Sutherlandshire.--Grant of £3000 for boat harbour. Lighthouses and Beacons.-Grant of £4500 for various lighthouses and beacons.

The fishermen of Scrabster in Caithness are not likely to forget that it was to their Radical member, Dr. Clark, they owed the loss of the handsome grant which the Government had intended to give for the construction of a harbour.

Two Departmental Commissions were appointed by Lord Salisbury's Government to inquire into Scottish fishery questions. The first conducted an exhaustive inquiry into Crown rights in salmon fishings, and presented a report thereon. The second carried through an inquiry in the interests of fishermen into the white fisheries on the Solway.

CHAPTER VIII.

WHAT THE CONSERVATIVE AND UNIONIST PARTY HAVE DONE FOR MINERS.

It is convenient to notice next the legislation in the special interests of those engaged in coal mines, the history of which closely resembles that of the Factory Acts. No class of the community is more persistently told that the Conservatives have been opposed to their progress than the miners. Yet it can be proved beyond question that Conservative statesmen have at all times shown the greatest interest in and sympathy with the miners, and have taken an active and leading share in diminishing the risks of their calling and improving their condition.

It is an interesting historical fact that Scottish miners owed their liberty to Acts of Parliament passed under the Tory Governments of Lord North and Mr. Pitt. By the old law of Scotland, colliers and salters were "bound merely by their entering upon work in a colliery or salt manufactory to the perpetual service thereof." By an Act1 passed in 1775, when Lord North was Prime Minister, it was provided that they "should be no otherwise bound than as other workmen," and on its being found that this Act was sometimes evaded, another Act 2 was passed under Mr. Pitt, in 1799, by which they were completely "freed from their servitude."

But coming to this century, and dealing with political parties as we know them to-day, we find that it is also true that miners owed the first great measure improving their condition to Conservative statesmen and a Conservative majority in Parliament. Conservative assistance has been freely given since then, and has done much to improve the lot of the miners, and the last great measure of the same kind was passed by the ConservativeUnionist Government of Lord Salisbury.

The Coal Mines Regulation Act of 1842.-The first great reform was due to the late Lord Shaftesbury, when as Lord Ashley he was Conservative member for Dorsetshire. By his exertions a Royal Commission was appointed in 1840, which brought to light the hideous system, well described as startling and horrible," under which boys and girls six years $39 Geo. III. c. 56.

1

15

Geo. III. c. 28.

2