Mr. John Short, M. P. for Gaspé, examined by Mr. Davies, gave evi dence as follows: Q. Can you give the Commission an estimate of the quantity of fish taken by our fishermen annually along the coast ?-A. From Mount Cape Chatte to New Richmond the catch would be about 100,000 quintals. Q. Where is New Richmond?-A. On Bay Chaleurs. There is Anticosti and the north shore of the St. Lawrence, from Joli northwestward, which will give 100,000 quintals, making together 200,000 quintals. Q. The north shore of the St. Lawrence and Anticosti will give 100,000 quintals ?—A. Yes, with the Magdalen Islands. Q. What kind of fish is taken ?—A. Codfish chiefly; herring is the next catch in quantity and importance. Q. You don't fish mackerel to any extent?-A. No. You don't go into it for the purpose of trade ?—A. No; we find the codfish more remunerative. Q. What is the value of those 200,000 quintals of fish ?-A. The coast value is about $5 per quintal, which would give a value of $1,000,000. The market value is higher; it ranges from $5 to $8 per quintal. Q. How far are those fish taken from shore by the fishermen, take the north shore ?-A. Principally, and nearly altogether, inshore. Q. Now take the south shore ?—A. From Cape Chatte to Cape Gaspé they are all taken inshore, and from Cape Gaspé to New Richmond the greater portion is taken inshore; some are taken on Banks. Q. Where do the American cod-fishermen get their bait?-A. They get a great quantity from the inshore fishery. Q. Have you seen them catch bait?-A. I have seen them set nets, but not take them up. Q. Have you any doubt that they do catch bait?—A. I have not. They often draw seines to shore for caplin and small bait. Q. Could the Americans carry on the deep-sea cod-fishery without that bait?-A. Not with success. Q. You are quite sure about that?—A. Yes; I have no hesitation in saying it could not be carried on. Mr. Josef O. Sirois tells the Commission, in his examination by my. self: I am a merchant at Grande Riviere, county of Gaspé. I have employed men to fish for me round my neighborhood. I have fished on the south side of the river St. Lawrence, from Paspebiac to Cape Gaspé, a distance of about 90 miles. My fishing was done with small boats, each having two men; I generally have six of such boats employed fishing. I have carried on this kind of business during the last twenty years. It is cod we take on that coast. Cod is slightly more abundant than it was twenty years ago; it may be that each boat takes less, but the number of boats has considerably increased during that period. Part of the cod is taken along the coast, and the remainder on Miscou Bank. Cod is taken from one to two miles from the coast. They take about half their catch on the coast within the distance mentioned, and the remaining half on Miscou Bank. They take cod with bait, consisting of caplin, herring, squid, smelt, and mackerel. The bait is obtained at from a quarter of a mile to two miles from the coast; it is very rare the fishermen would have to go out as far as three miles to take bait. American fishermen could not bring fresh bait from their homes. It cannot be kept with ice to be used advantageously for more than two days. The effect of placing bait on ice is to soften it so that it will not hold on the hooks. I have seen a number of American schooners fishing mackerel on the coast. Mr. Louis Roy, of Cape Chatte, testified to the Commission, in reply to myself, as follows: Q. What part of the coast of the river St. Lawrence are you acquainted with ?—A. From Cape Chatte to Cape Gaspé. Q. What is the distance between those points?-A. About 140 miles. Q. That is on the south coast ?-A. Yes. Q. Do you know anything of the north coast?-A. I have some knowledge of the north coast, but am not so familiar with it as with the south coast. Q. What extent of coast on the north side do you know ?-A. About 160. Q. That would make a length of three hundred miles of the river coast, that you are acquainted with ?—A. Yes. Q. Is it to your knowledge that the Americans have been fishing on that part of the river St. Lawrence?-A. O, yes; they have fished near iny place very often. Q. When did they begin to fish on that part of the river?-A. About 1854. Q. The time of the Reciprocity Treaty ?-A. Yes. Q. Until then you had never seen much of them?-A. O, yes. I saw many during the ten years previous to that. Q. But they came in large numbers after that date?-A. Yes; they came in large numbers for about six or seven years. But after that they came in less numbers. Q. You mean during the last years?-A. Yes. Q. At the time they were frequenting that part of the river, how many sail have you any knowledge of as visiting the coast ?-A. From Cape Gaspé to Cape Chatte? Q. Yes, on the north shore also ?-A. About 260 or 300 sails. Q. Schooners?-A. Yes. Q. What was the general tonnage?-A. About 70 or 80 tons. Q. That is the average ?-A. Yes; there would be some 50 tons and some 120. Q. You say that many visited during one season?-A. From spring to fall; O, yes. Q. After the Treaty of Reciprocity?-A. Not so much. Q. You mean not so much after the treaty was terminated?-A. Yes. Q. But during its existence ?-A. Well, about the number I have stated. Q. Were they fishing for fish to trade with ?-A. Yes. Q. What kind of fish was it?-A. Cod. Q. Where was the cod caught?-A. Do you mean what distance from the shore? Q. Well, out of these 300 miles you have spoken of, where could cod be fished for out off the coast -A. Well, for about 15 or 20 miles off the north shore. On the south shore there are none at all outside. You can't catch off beyond three miles on the south shore. Q. Where are those 15 or 20 miles ?-A. From Mingan. Q. Have you any knowledge of the catch that one of those schooners would take; neither the largest nor the smallest? Take an average.-A. About between 500 or 600 barrels, each vessel. Q. For the whole season?—A. Yes; because some of them made two trips and some three. Q. Well, then they would not take 500 or 600 barrels each trip?-A. No, no; I mean for the whole season. Q. Is the cod as abundant now as it was 30 or 40 years ago? Do you get as much ?—A. O, yes; as much as 30 or 40 years ago. I am sure of it. # Q. Have you any idea what quantity of fish is taken by the Canadians in that part of the river -A. O, yes; I have a memorandum here. I calculate that the catch of codfish from Cape Chatte to Cape Gaspé, along the coast, is about 220,000 quintals of dry fish, valued at $4.50 & quintal. Q. Do you know if much of that is exported to the United States?-A. Not at all; not any. Q. Now, as to the mackerel. Is that the fish for which the Americans were fishing on that part of the river ?-A. Yes. Q. Where is the mackerel taken generally?—A. It is within three miles, because always the fat mackerel is inside of a mile-close by. Q. Well, from the knowledge you have of the locality, do you think you would see any American schooners if they were prevented from fishing within three miles of the shore ?— A. No. Q. Would it be profitable for them?-A. They cannot do it. cause they would not catch enough to pay expenses. They would not come be Mr. James Jessop, of Gaspé, examined by Mr. Weatherbe, testifies as follows: Q. As a matter of fact, where do they get most of the bait, on the shores or on the Banks -A. More inshore than on the Banks. Q. Do the Americans come inshore constantly for bait?-A. They may not come on our shores, but on other shores they do. Most of them go to Shippengan, which is a great place for fishing herring. The herring come in from the Banks of Shippegan; the Americans catch them and also follow them inshore. Q. The Americans come from the Banks on purpose to catch bait ?-A. Yes; and when they go out of the bay they get fresh bait when the herring school is passing out. Q. How long does fresh bait last ?-A. It will only keep fresh one day. Q. That is when there is no ice on board to preserve it ?-A. Yes. Q. Where there is ice, how long will the bait keep fresh ?-A. Two or three days. Q. From Cape Chatte to Cape Gaspé, how far from the shore did the Americans fish ?—A. From Cape Chatte to Cape Gaspé the Americans came in along the shore. I never fished there. I have passed up and down and seen American vessels fishing for mackerel right along the shore. Q. Did you see or hear of Americans fishing for mackerel outside of three miles from shore -A. No; all within one mile, one mile and a half, and two miles of the shore. Q. Did you ever hear of any fishing outside three miles ?-A. Not on that coast. Q. On the north side of Bay Chaleurs where are mackerel found?-A. The great body of mackerel is along the shore. A few may be caught outside in deep water, but the mackerel make into the shore and come after small bait. Q. Where are most of the mackerel caught?—A. Handy to the shore; sometimes a mile and a half out. Sometimes not five acres out. Q. Do you know from the Americans themselves whether they catch the greater part of the mackerel inshore ?-A. Yes. The vessel I was on board fished inshore with boats. The vessel was at anchor in Newport harbor. Q. How far from the land?-A. About 300 yards. Q. Did you catch all the fish there?-A. There were no fish in the harbor; we caught them in a cove called Carnaval. Q. How far from the shore?-A. About two cables length. We got 100 barrels one day. Q. Did you catch your fish far from the shore?-A. The farthest we caught might be half a mile off. Q. How many did you catch?-A. I could not say exactly, but we pretty nearly loaded her. I left her, and she afterwards left to transship her cargo. Q. Do the Americans fish along your shores for cod ?-A. They do. Q. Within three miles from shore?-A. Yes. Q. To any extent ?-A. They don't fish codfish to any great extent within three miles from shore. Q. Where do they fish for cod?-A. On Miscou Bank and Bank Orphan. Q. What is the number of the fleet engaged in fishing on Miscou Bank alone?—A. I have heard my men say from 40 to 50 sail. Q. You would put the average at 40 sail?-A. Yes. Q. Do you know what is the number of the cod-fishing fleet in the bay on an average each year?-A. From 300 to 400 vessels. Q. Nearer 400 than 300 ?--A. About 400. Q. Where do these cod-fishermen get the bait they use ?-A. A great deal of it inshore, along our coast. Q. How do they get it?-A. By setting nets inshore, and sometimes by buying it. Q. What kind of fish do they catch for bait?-A. Herring. I have seen them seining herring. I have heard that they jig squid and bob mackerel. Q. They catch caplin ?-A. Yes. Mr. Joseph Couteau, of Cape Despair, examined by myself, gives the following evidence: I am 42 years of age. I live at Cape Despair, in the county of Gaspé. I am a fisherman, and at present employ men in the fishing business. This fishery is carried on along the coast from one to three miles from the shore, and also on Miscou Bank. The Americans fish there. I have seen as many as 40 sail fishing there at the same time. The Americans procure their bait along and near the coast. The bait consists of herring, caplin, and squid. The cod-fishery cannot be prosecuted to advantage with salt bait. The Americans cannot bring with them to Miscou Bank a sufficient supply of bait. In 1857 I fished in an American schooner called the Maria. I do not remember her captain's name. The schooner was fitted out at and started from Portland. During the first three months of the voyage, we fished for cod along Cape Breton, the Magdalen Islands, and Miscou Bank. At Cape Breton we took the cod at distances of from a mile to a mile and a half from the shore. We fished at about the same distance from the shore at the Magdalen Islands. We took 330 quintals of cod. We caught about three-quarters of our load within three miles of the coast off Cape Breton and the Magdalen Islands and the remainder at Miscou Bank. We procured our bait on the Cape Breton shore. Mr. Abraham Lebrun, of Perce, examined by Mr. Weatherbe, tells the Commission where the Americans procure their bait: Q. Where do they procure their bait?-A. The generality of them procure it on the coast. Q. How do they get it?-A. In nets. They take herring in nets. Q. And what else?—A. Squid; they also seine caplin on our coast. Q. Where do they get their nets with which they catch it?-A. They bring them with them. Q. Where did they get the bait after the abrogation of the Reciprocity Treaty ?-A. They run the risk of capture to obtain it within three-miles limit. Q. Year after year?-A. Yes. Q. How do you know that ?—A. I have seen them do so. The witness is then asked about balibut: Q. Halibut are caught along the north shore of the river St. Lawrence for the distance of 180 miles, to which you have referred ?-A. Yes. Q. And they are taken on the coast of Anticosti, and along the south coast, and along the other coasts, on the south side of the St Lawrence, which you have mentioned ?-A. Yes, sir; from Cape Chatte to Cape Gaspé; this is a celebrated coast for halibut. Q. Are halibut caught on the shores of Gaspé and the Bay of Chaleurs ?-A. They are or have been caught there. Q. By whom is the halibut fishery carried on?—A. Chiefly by the Americans. Q. And how are they caught?-A. With trawls. Q. What effect has their mode of fishing had on the coast as a halibut-fishery ground?— A. With regard to halibut, it has injured the fishery. Q. By what means?-A. By overfishing. Halibut is a fish which does not reproduce itself like the cod, and of course the fishing is thus affected and injured. Q. By whom has this overfishing been done?—A. By the Americans. Q. During how many years ?-Å. It has been the case as long as I can remember; that is, from 1856 to the time when I left the north shore, in 1873. They have frequented the coast from year to year. Q. Is the halibut fishery carried on now on the south shore?-A. At present halibut are very scarce there, but formerly they were very plentiful on this coast. Mr. John Holliday, who pursues the fishing business on an extensive scale at the mouth of the Moisie River, testified, in his examination by Mr. Thomson, as follows: Q. Well, do you take no halibut or hake?-A. We take a few halibut, not of any great moment, this year past. Q. Why is that? It used to be plenty.-A. They used to be, but since 1868 or 1869 the coast is nearly cleaned of halibut by the American fishermen coming there. Two of them were taken in my neighborhood; that is, two of their vessels were taken by the cruisers. Q. What became of them ?-A. I think they were both condemned. Q. Well, were those halibut taken within three miles of the shore ?-A. O, yes; within about a mile and a half of the shore. Q. There was no doubt, then, about the fact of the infringement of the law, for which those vessels were taken?-A. I have seen several of them leave the coast and leave their lines. When they saw the cruisers come they stood out to sea, and came back a day or two afterward and picked up their lines. Q. That was within three miles-A. Yes. Q. How near?-A. About a mile and a half. Q. I do not know whether the atmosphere there is of that peculiar character that a vessel within half a mile will think she is three miles out ?-A. They could not well think that. Q. You can generally tell when you are within three miles?-A. Yes; at all events within smile and a half. Q. Well, you say that in 1868 and 1869 the American schooners came there and fished out the halibut?-A. Yes; they cleaned them out. Q. What kind of fishing was it?-A. With long lines or trawls. Q. There were a great many hooks upon them?-A. A great number; there were several miles of them. Q. What was the effect of that, either to your own knowledge or from what you have heard?-A. The whole of our inshore fishermen fished codfish and halibut. We get none now, or next to none. Q. No halibut, you mean?-A. No halibut. Q. Are they a fish that keep pretty close to the bottom, as a rule?-A. Yes. Q. Therefore they are the more liable to be taken up by the trawl?—A. That is the method adopted in this country of catching them, altogether. Q. Before the Americans came with a trawl, how did your people take them ?-A. With hand-lines. Q. Were they reasonably plenty in those days?-A. Yes; a boat has got from eight to ten. Now they very seldom get any. Q. Well, had the hand-line fishing been continued, and those trawls not introduced, is it or is it not your opinion that the halibut would be now there just as it used to be?-A. I think it would be as good as previously. Q. In your opinion, then, this trawl-fishing is simply destructive?-A. To halibut. SATURDAY, November 17, 1877. The Conference met. Mr. Doutre continued his argument in support of the case of Her Majesty's Government, as follows: May it please your Excellency and your Honors: When we separated yesterday, I demanded and obtained an adjourn. ment until Monday, as I considered I required that time to lay before the Commission the matter in issue, in its different aspects; and I am still of opinion that I would have fulfilled my duty in a more complete manner if the arrangement of yesterday had been adhered to. How. ever, a very pressing demand was made upon me to meet this afternoon, in order to close my part of the argument, and leave the way free and clear for my successor on Monday. With a strong desire to comply with the demand from gentlemen with whom I have been acting so cordially so far, and with whom I hope to act cordially up to the time of our separation, I made an effort to be able to present myself before the Commission at this hour. However, I shall have to deal, I fear, in a very ineffectual manner with the matters that remain to be considered. I have taken particular care in arranging the evidence and argument, not entirely for the reason that your honors required any information from me to form your opinion; I think after this long investigation the minds of your honors must be pretty well made up, and could not be much altered and influenced by any remarks I could offer. But we must not forget that this treaty is a temporary arrangement, which will be the object of fresh negotiations within a pretty short period, and I considered that those who will have to deal with the question five, six, or eight years hence will be unable readily to discover, in this mass of evidence, what part has a bearing upon one branch of the case, and what part upon another branch; and I thought it would be useful, if not for the present moment, for the future, to make a complete investigation of the evidence, and to place it in such a shape that those who shall succeed your honors in dealing with this question may be guided in some way through these fields of testimony. When we adjourned yesterday, I was showing at what distance from the shore the codfishery in the estuary of the St. Lawrence is prosecuted. Before proceeding to another part of the evidence I desire to draw the attention of your bonors to what has fallen from the learned counsel on behalf of the United States, Mr. Foster and Mr. Trescot. Mr. Trescot admits that the British case can be supported by proof of "the habit of United States fishermen." If fifty fishermen of a fishing fleet swore that it was the habit of the fleet to fish inshore and fifty swore that it was the habit never to fish inshore, you might not know which to believe; but supposing, what in this case will not be disputed, that the witnesses were of equal veracity, you would certainly know that you had not proved the habit. You will see, therefore, that the burden of proof is on our friends. They must prove their catch equal in value to the award they claim. If they cannot do that, and undertake to prove habit, then they must do what they have not done-prove it by an overwhelming majority of witnesses. With equal testimony their proof fails. There is an enormous quantity of testimony produced, on the part of Her Majesty's Government, to show that the United States fishing fleet constantly, throughout the season, fished within three miles of almost all the shores of the Gulf of St. Lawrence-on the shores of Nova Scotia (including all the shores of Cape Breton), the shores of Prince Ed ward Island, the west shore of the gulf, the shores of Bay de Chaleur and Gaspé, both shores of the River St. Lawrence, and the whole north shore to Labrador, the shores of Anticosti, as well as the shores of the Bay of Fundy. The various fleets of United States vessels were very seldom if ever, during the fishing season, out of sight of very large numbers of respectable and intelligent witnesses residing on various parts of the coast, whose sworn evidence has been received by the Commission. Besides, witnesses-too numerous to mention-have given ev. idence sufficient literally to fill a volume, of having fished in American bottoms; and they testify that the common custom of the various fleets |