Q. As far as regards the totals given there they are approximately correct? A. Yes; the whole thing was got up as an advertisement. Q. An advertisement of Gloucester and its trade ?—A. Yes; for the Centennial, to advertise our business to the world.

Q. When you stated that the value of property at Gloucester had decreased 33 per cent. during recent years, did you wish it to be inferred that that was a special feature in Gloucester alone, or is it not owing to the commercial depression which has extended all over the country?—A. It is not limited to Gloucester. Shoe-manufacturing towns have felt it. Q. Nor is it confined to the fishing business alone?-A. Not at all. Q. Is there any other trade which Gloucester has as a specialty besides the fishing business?-A. It is the largest business we do.

Q. Would I not be correct in saying that nine-tenths of the employed capital at Gloucester is engaged directly or indirectly in the fisheries? -A. Seventy-five per cent. of the employed capital is engaged directly or indirectly. Our clothing houses, sail-makers, and other businesses are connected with it indirectly.

Q. Is the pamphlet correct in stating that the valuation in 1840 was about one million and now nine millions, with a population of 16,754 ?— A. I presume the valuation of nine millions is about right.

Q. Is not the statement that in 1840 the valuation was one million, correct?-A. I presume so; I know nothing to the contrary.

Q. If 75 per cent. of the employed capital of Gloucester is engaged in the fishing business, does not that prove that it must be owing to the fishing business, almost altogether, that Gloucester has made these strides ?-A. The increase in Gloucester is not all increase in business; it has increased in population. People have moved in and brought money in and are using it there. The increase in the valuation has not been in the fishing business altogether; it has mainly, I admit; but men have moved in who are assessed for larger amounts and pay large taxes and who prefer to come there on account of the high taxes of Boston, and spend part of the season there. They have increased the valuation.

Q. You say that it has mainly increased from that cause, but that there are other causes which contribute to it?-A. Yes; I have been confining myself to the last ten years.

Q. Is not the great underlying cause of the increase in the returns from the fisheries?-A. No.

Q. Tell me what is the great underlying cause?-A. There has been a great increase in the valuation of Gloucester by reason of its becoming noted as a summer resort. That has been the cause of the greatest increase. There has been no increase in the fishery business of any note. They have increased the value of property there by putting a higher valuation on it; the same property as we had before.

Q. You assented to the statement that the fishing business was the main cause, but not that it is the great underlying cause?—A. I mean within ten years.

Q. You confine your last statement to ten years. During the last ten years Gloucester has become noted as a watering-place?-A. It has increased in population within ten years. I am speaking more particularly of the increase in the valuation on the assessors' books. That increase has not been due to an increase in the fishing business. The valuation in 1856 or 1858 was about four millions. I did more mackerel business in 1848 than I have done this year. I had twelve vessels in the bay that year.

Q. Will you say that the most of those engaged in fishing did more business in 1848 than now?-A. They did not.

Q. Where has the money come from which has built the large buildings and public works and railways?-A. From living economically and saving something every year.

Q. You have said that Gloucester is drawing in business from its neighbors?—A. The facilities we have at Gloucester for supplying and repairing vessels, and doing other work connected with them, are beyond those possessed by any other place. We import our salt. We imported 90,000 hogsheads last year.

Q. All other businesses are dependent on the fishing business more or less-A. If it was not for the fishing business we would not want so much salt. We get a profit and return from that which other places used to get. We used to go to Boston for our salt, and not import it, and to other places for what we now produce ourselves. Now we salt our own fish, and are middle-men.

Q. Are not those middlemen growing, not, perhaps rich, but making money?-A. No; I don't think they are making much.

Q. Are they making something?-A. They would if they got all their bills paid, but they have bad debts; that is the trouble.

Q. So that really the incidental business which naturally attaches itself to the fishing business pays?—A. It gives a man a living, that is all.

Q. And enables him to lay by a little?--A. A trifle.

Q. I suppose the firm of which you are a member is worth to-day a good deal of money?—A. I am the only member of the firm.

Q. I would not be wrong in estimating that you are worth from $75,000 to $100,000 ?—A. I have earned more than my living outside of my business, in holding offices and settling estates. If I am worth $50,000 the fishing business cannot be credited with all of it, although I have had a good fleet of vessels and attended to the business.

Q. You have said your vessels have not paid expenses during the last eight years?—A. I think the results will prove that the vessels have not paid their bills.

Q. You make up a profit and loss account every year?—A. Yes. Q. Showing the profit and loss on each venture?--A. Yes; on each vessel.

Q. Mr. Davies asked witness to prepare a statement from his books, showing the result of each voyage during the existence of the Reciprocity Treaty.

Q. Your statement covering nineteen years shows that you lost about $128 each year?-A. I got a certain amount for the use of the vessels. Q. That is only interest on the capital employed?-A. We don't always charge it when we own the vessel. I made something also by packing.

Q. How did you make money to invest ?-A. I had good credit.
Q. Were not the vessels owned by you absolutely?-A. No.

Q. None of them?-A. Not many of them. They were in my name, but their debts were not paid and are not all paid now. I was in good credit.

Q. In regard to the account of the catches of mackerel you gave, the result showed a loss?-A. The result is a loss to the owners of the vessels.

Q. Have you made up a statement showing for those 19 years what the result has been of the voyage of vessels fishing for mackerel on the American coast ?-A. I have not.

Q. Can you do it here ?-A. No.

Q. You would have to go to Gloucester to do it ?-A. Yes; I have

here a statement since 1866 showing the number of vessels and number of barrels taken, but not the dollars and cents.

Q. What does this statement show ?-(Statement exhibited.) A. I sell the mackerel to others, and that is an account of the amount received from the sale of the mackerel, of which the crew received their half and I received mine. That is clear of the packing.

Q. Out of the packing and incidental business connected with the sale of the fish, you make a profit?-A. Yes; and out of curing the fish. Q. And on all the articles supplied ?—A. A small percentage.

Q. You limit this statement to the actual cost of taking the fish yourself and what you received for them -A. Yes.

Q. How was the small sum of $9,905 realized in the year 1861 for 1,896 barrels ?-A. It was owing to the price of mackerel for number ones, twos, and threes.

Q. In 1862, 698 barrels realized $5,305, and in 1863, 1,424 barrels realized $15,628-this only shows how much in gross you realized these years-A. Yes.

Q. Can you give an estimate of the cost of each barrel of mackerel on the average for the catch?-A. In that statement it is perhaps as correct as it can be got.

Q. How do you find out whether each of these trips is profitable or not?—A. All the trips go into the year's work.

Q. Can you from your books for these years give me the actual result showing the profit which you made on each of these voyages ?—A. It is impossible for anybody to do that; the books relate to the proceed. ings of the whole year, and a vessel runs for 10 months.

Q. You have made up an approximate statement and you show a deficit, and I want to get from the actual books what they show ?—A. I cannot give you what you desire to have.

Q. Taking the S. L. Lamb, the first vessel, she caught so many barrels and realized so much, can you tell me from your books whether you lost or made money during that trip?—A. No; that trip is part of the year's work.

Q. Is not each trip made up by itself, and does it not enable you to pay the men off?-A. Yes, and one-half of the results goes to the credit of the vessel's account.

Q. And all the charges made against the trip would be charged?-A. The direct charges for provisions, &c, would be, but not the general charges against the vessel. The charges for insurance, sails, rigging, and anchors, &c., would all be placed in the general bills.

By Sir Alexander Galt:

Q. How do you get at the expenses connected with the 119 trips?-A. I will explain; you first make up a paper showing the number of trips made in these 19 years, and the number of barrels taken in British waters.

By Mr. Davies:

Q. How do you distinguish between them?-A. These are mackerel brought out from the bay of St. Lawrence via Canso.

Q. You give the number of barrels and the value realized from them; and then you have a column showing the average trip, what do you mean by that?-A. I mean, say 16 trips and so many barrels for the 16 trips, and the average would be 1-16 for each trip. If these 16 trips realized 3,000 barrels, 1-16 of 3,000 would be the average. Each year would have an average for itself.

Q. This gives the average quantity taken each trip, and the average

value?-A. The average price of so many barrels would be for each barrel so much.

Q. How do you get at the average value ?-A. By dividing the product by the number of barrels.

Q. And that would leave $7.80 as the price of mackerel in 1857 ?—A. The figures are quoted.

Q. Then you make up another column showing the expenses?-A.

Yes.

Q. If you take the aggregate values, after you pay the men off, what would be the result; an average trip is 183 barrels, which, at $11.57, realize $2,117, less $180 for bait?-A. That is taken out of the whole stock.

Q. Something else comes out of the whole stock besides bait ?—A. I put that down. On a mackerel voyage there is little else save bait; but on cod-fishing voyages there are other items.

Q. The crew's half is $968-what do you deduct from this amount?A. That goes to the crew.

Q. And the owner's half?-A. I credit that to the vessel.

Q. The item for insurance is $125-A. That is for the time she was employed on that voyage.

Q. How do you make it up?-A. It is 23 per cent. on $5,000 for the trip.

Q. Do you insure for $5,000 on the vessel ?—A. We insure the value of the vessel. It costs about 24 per cent. a trip to the bay on the aver age for those years; that is made up by computing 2 per cent. on $5,000.

Q. Four per cent. on 1,937 comes out of the owner's share?-A. Yes, entirely.

Q. Provisions, oil, and fuel cost $390. How do you make this up?—A. I arrived at that from figures prepared by myself, and from my own books, proving that it costs 40 cents a day per man for these items to fit out our vessels in our way. I prove that by actual figures taken from our books, and 40 cents a day for 14 men for 10 weeks make $390.

Q. How do you arrive at the cost of salt, fishing gear, and the vessel's running expenses?-A. I make it up from an estimate furnished by my own experience regarding the portion of the vessel's bills for ten weeks' time, including sails, railway bills, painting, rigging, cables, and anchors, &c. The ordinary running expenses of a vessel for that period of time, or two and a half months, would amount to that sum of money.

Q. And how is it with respect to depreciation and interest on invest. ment?-A. That is computed on actual value.

Q. You charge interest, $75, on the money invested ?-A. I charge it on $5,000, the value of the vessel for two and a half months, the time she was employed.

Q. This statement shows that you lost on an average $128 per trip during these nineteen years, and as there were 170 trips this would amount to $21,760; will you undertake to say that you lost this amount, and that your actual experience tallies with this approximate which you have submitted?-A. I undertake to say that I would have lost that much if I had nothing to do beyond owning and running vessels.

Q. You mean to say that the gains obtained from one branch of your business recoup you for the loss you sustained elsewhere, and that this leaves you a profit?-A. I suppose so, but as to the profit it does not give us much profit beyond what we earn. Any man who does a day's work earns his wages.

Q. It does not give you a profit beyond the loss which you sustain ?

A. I do not say that; but if we work with our hands, as we all do at home, and do work which other men would not do-for this work we charge, as we expect to do, at least as much as any hired man would.

Q. You are entitled to charge the business for your time, and you take that into consideration ?-A. Yes.

Q. And it does not leave you much profit beyond that?-A. Yes. Q. You make sufficient to live upon and pay your expenses and have some little surplus ?-A. We have a trifle over sometimes, some years. Q. Have you not on the whole, during these nineteen years, put some. thing to the good?--A. Yes. During the four years of the war I made money beyond what I ever did in my life at any other time; and that gave me capital and something to pay my debts with and for vessels; but this was during four years, while our currency was inflated and prices high. These are the only four years during which I made money to speak of, but now when I take stock one year and then take it next year, I find there is no margin. Of course this is plain talking, and these are facts taken from my books. There was no margin for all last year's work; and there was no difference between last year's balance and that of the year before, but the year before that we made a very good year's work.

Q. Last year you sent all your vessels to fish off the American shore, one excepted?-A. Yes.

Q. And you say you did not make any money; you lost ?—A. I did not make or lose much in British waters the year previous.

Q. But last year you lost money?—A. Last year I did not make any. thing.

Q. You came out square?—A. About-I suppose so.

Q. You have stated that you examined your books, and that if I refer to them I will find so and so ?-A. Yes.

Q. Did you make or lose by the transactions of last year?-A. There were $1,000 difference between the last year and the year before in my stock account.

Q. And the year before you made $1,000?-A. Yes; and the year before that I made more than $1,000, according to my books.

Q. Which way was the $1,000, to the good or to the bad, last year?— A. It was so little that I forget, but the year previously it was on the right side.

Q. The years 1875 and 1876 were the best years, I have understood, that you have had on the American coast for a long time?—A. Well, I do not know about that.

Q. I mean as regards the catch of mackerel ?—A. I did not get part of it. I did not get any, if it was so.

Q. Were not these years the best you have had on your coast for some time for mackerel seining?-A. I only had one vessel catching mackerel on our coast last year; the others were cod-fishing; and that is where I am short. Yes; I think that last year and the year before were two very good years on our coast.

Q. Then, I understand that the result of your evidence would be this, that the Commission are to understand that while the actual fisherman does not make a profit out of his business, the fish merchant makes a handsome profit?-A. No.

Q. You have lost $21,000 as a fisherman during these 19 years, and as a merchant you have recovered this $21,000 and something over?— A. I made part of that in the business of fitting out vessels and packing the mackerel.