Part 19

We are willing to make every allowance for the difference in the character and disposition of the Scotch and Irish (although the majority of the one, so far as _fishers_ are concerned, are as _Celtic_ as the other), and for many disturbing elements in the Green Isle which do not so deeply and fatally pervade the social state of our own people; but still, where we find, on the one hand, a most important branch of commerce long established and maintained in security, and now on the increase from year to year, and on the other a desponding if not decreasing condition of affairs, carried on with little energy and no success,—there seems nothing unreasonable in the supposition, that management and methodical regulation, a long-continued course of instruction, an unceasing supervision, and encouragement both by precept and example, to work up and attain to a higher standard of excellence than heretofore, may have produced the most beneficial effect in the former case; while the absence of such ameliorating causes, and of all counteractions of apathy and ignorance, may have been injurious in the latter. The Scotch fishermen and fish-curers have experienced, and still enjoy, the advantages referred to,—the Irish have not been deprived of them, because they never had them in possession. The Scotch herring fishery is by far the greatest and most successful in the world,—the Irish is unfortunately the smallest and least prosperous on the waters of the known earth; and why should we seek to assimilate the two by adding much to nothing, rather than by endeavouring to create something out of nothing, and thus increasing the previously existing stores of national wealth? Of course, we know not with certainty what effect would follow the formation along the still unproductive Irish shores of a machinery in accordance with the system which has proved so signally successful along the wild coasts of much more barren and ungenial Scotland; but we think it would surely be a wiser and more generous policy to try the experiment of assimilation, rather by endeavouring to raise up Ireland to what it ought to be, than run the risk of bringing the two countries into somewhat similar condition, by sacrificing any of the few advantages which Scotland now enjoys.

If the accurate ascertainment of the statistics of the land is now deemed of such vital importance, surely that of the sea, to this great maritime and commercial nation, is no way less so. This brings us to the consideration of the performance of another important duty of the Board, the advantages of which we should of course lose on its abolition. Our marine and fishery statistics have been hitherto collected with great fulness and accuracy by the officers of the Board, and annually reported to Parliament. On the demolition of the Board, who are to perform the same functions in time to come? If the coast-guard is to be so employed, as it is in Ireland, let us briefly inquire into the well-doing of that system there.

In reference to the marine statistics of the sister isle, as collected and transmitted by the coast-guard, the Irish Fishery Commissioners report as follows:—

“The doubts which we have expressed in former reports of the accuracy of the tabular returns, which are founded upon information furnished by the coast-guard department, are, we regret to state, undiminished. Several cases in which we have endeavoured to test their correctness, have convinced us that _not even an approximate estimate_ can be formed of the actual extent and state of the fishing establishment on the coast. From any sources within our reach, unaided by anything like a responsible staff, _we are unable to obtain the necessary information_, or to effect that perfect organisation of the coast which would tend to the promotion of the fisheries and the preservation of order—an object of vital importance to the well-working of the fisheries, as well as to the peace of the country.

“We have in our department but one clerk, whose duties are sometimes necessarily extended to visiting distant stations for the promulgation of by-laws, or for other purposes; and on such occasions we have required of him to furnish us with a statement of his progress. His reports prove how exceedingly valuable the services of qualified persons would be, instead of the desultory and unsatisfactory information which we are enabled to procure from irresponsible persons, who are bound to make our business quite subordinate to their more important duties. We subjoin a copy of the circular and queries which we issue annually to the coast-guard department; and in most cases we find that five out of the seven questions asked are either not answered at all, or in a manner not calculated to afford much information.”[23]

In a subsequent report the Inspecting Commissioners state, in relation to the Belmullet district, which extends from Duna Head to Butter Point, that the diminution in the number of boats and hands is so great as to seem quite incredible. They attribute this not so much to the actual decrease, as to the erroneous and exaggerated information formerly received. “There are no first-class boats, and only 190 second class, with 676 men and boys, instead of the former establishment, which was stated to have been 962 vessels, with 3376 men and boys. This clearly proves the great inaccuracy of former returns.”[24]

In the most recent report of the Irish Commissioners the following is the conclusion come to:—

“We cannot conclude this report on the coast fisheries of Ireland without expressing our deep regret that we are not furnished with data which would enable us to supply accurate statistical information as to the physical resources which may be found upon our shores for purposes of national defence. The encouragement of our coast fisheries used in former times to be considered the most effectual and legitimate means of providing for our navy.... In France we are told that the whole commercial navy—masters, mates, sailors, and shipboys—are under the eye and jurisdiction of the Minister of Marine;—nay, every fisherman, waterman, ferryman, oyster-dredger, and boat-builder is registered. We very much wish that we had been enabled to establish even a less perfect system of organisation, but we find ourselves more deficient in means of obtaining accurate information every succeeding year; and we entertain little hopes that, until the present plan of registry is much improved, we can ever attempt to present returns the accuracy of which we could vouch for.”[25]

We do not think that the preceding extracts are encouraging, or hold out any great inducement to assimilate our established mode of marine statistical collection to that of Ireland. Far better to abide as we are, and “let well alone.” It may also be borne in mind, that so far as the north-west portions of Scotland, with their numerous and deeply-indented fishing-bays, are concerned, there is actually no coast-guard in existence.

A single paragraph may suffice in regard to the general marine superintendence, or police duties, as exercised by the Board of Fisheries. These duties are chiefly performed by boats’ crews from the Princess Royal fishery cutter. We may refer to the fact that the Chamber of Commerce of Wick apply each season to the Board for a boat’s crew to be stationed at Wick, for the purpose of preserving order in the fleet of fishing-boats assembled in that overcrowded mart; and that the results are invariably so successful and satisfactory, that no complaints of brawling or contention are ever made. On the contrary, the Chamber of Commerce seems annually to express and record its grateful acknowledgments to the Board for its efficient services in this particular matter of the preservation of the peace. The following, however, is of a somewhat different complexion, in the last Report of the Irish Commissioners, regarding the state of matters in the Green Isle:—

“The fishers and buyers complain greatly of the absence of some regulations for the preservation of order among the multitude of boats and people that are often assembled; and still more of the absence of any summary jurisdiction for enforcing regulations and settling disputes between the boatmen themselves, and between them and the purchasers; and have agreed upon a memorial to the Lord-Lieutenant upon the subject, which, doubtless, will come before the Board in due time.”[26] “The inspecting commander at Donaghadee complains that the people do not conform to the laws with regard to the size of the meshes; and that with poke nets, used in Lough Strangford, great quantities of fry of cod, whiting, pollock, blocken, sythes, salmon-trout, turbot, golpens, and smelts, from two to three inches long, are destroyed.”[27]

We may now say a few words regarding the somewhat disputed subject of the _brand_. Many of our readers are, no doubt, so innocent as not to know very precisely what this mysterious symbol indicates. The mark called the _Full crown Brand_ merely means, that the herrings contained in the barrel which bears it have been regularly selected and assorted from the first, as of full size, good quality, and fresh condition; that they have been gutted and salted immediately after capture; have gone through various intermediate curative processes not needful to be here detailed; have lain at least ten days in pickle since their first presentment in the market-place; and having been then carefully inspected by the fishery officer of the station, and found in every way excellent and in sound order, have had the heads and girdings of their barrels firmly and finally fixed down by the cooper, and so being entitled to the Government Brand, have accordingly had that distinction impressed upon them by means of a hot iron which “the likeness of a queenly crown has on.”

Now, it has been argued by some, who, like Campbell’s sable chieftain of the Indian forest,—

“Scorning to wield the hatchet for a bribe, ’Gainst Brand himself have gone in battle forth,”

that this is an interference with the freedom of trade, which should be left open to all competitors, without fear or favour. They maintain that although it may be convenient and advantageous to dealers, it practically tends to confine improvement in the mode of cure within the limits just necessary to secure the brand, and that there is thus no inducement held out to a fish-curer to surpass his fellows,—the Government brand, as it were, equalising the value of the article, although one set of barrels may be much better than another. It is also asserted that the brand creates an artificial system inconsistent with proper and prevailing principles, and that the sounder system now applied to the linen and woollen trade (from both of which the Government mark has been for some time removed), and all along to the fisheries of Ireland, should be put in force.

In reply to these objections, it may be mentioned that herrings are of a very different nature from linen or woollen fabrics, and after being packed for exportation, cannot have their character and condition ascertained by either touch or eye-sight, without injury to their future state. The brand is _not compulsory_, and can scarcely present any barrier to improvement in the cure of herrings, because if any curer, more skilful than his neighbours, can find out and put in practice any better method than that now in use, he is entirely free to do so, and may thus establish his name, and trust to it, independent of the brand. Moreover, whatever may be the philosophical value of the principle in political economy pointed out as deserving of a preference in the abstract, it must practically (and the gutting and curing of herrings are very practical operations in their way) be borne in mind, that our fisheries have grown up rapidly under the present system, which was found necessary to enable us to compete with the Dutch, whom we have thereby driven out of whatever markets are open to us without disadvantageous differential duties, and that our now prosperous practice is sunk into the very foundations of our foreign trade, affecting the wellbeing of almost countless thousands, from the forlorn fisherman to the wealthiest capitalist, or most aspiring speculator.

It is assuredly a strong fact, that the foreign merchants themselves are unanimous in favour of the continuance of the present system, as enabling them to transmit their barrels, on the faith of the brand, into far inland countries, where the names of our native curers, however familiar to many of ourselves, are necessarily quite unknown, but where the acknowledged _crown brand_, by its simplicity and certainty, suffices for every purpose of an agreed-on guarantee. Great derangement of the foreign trade, and consequent disadvantage, are naturally apprehended from any sudden departure from the existing long-established system. The trouble and expense which, in absence of the brand, necessarily follow the practice of _braken_ (that is, inspection by opening) would inevitably decrease the profits of both the fishermen and curers in our own country; because as each party through whose hands the fish pass from their first capture to their final consumption must reap some share of profit, whatever increases the difficulties of the intermediate stages, tends to lower prices in this country. The duties paid abroad, both of import and transit, and other unavoidable charges, prevent the exaction of any higher prices in the foreign market, because any considerable increase would be tantamount to prohibition, and would thus debar any sales whatever. As the price, then, must remain the same, or nearly so, to the foreign consumer, a large proportion of the loss occasioned by increased expense would unavoidably fall upon our own people. Now, it is well known that, in consequence of the perilous and uncertain nature of a fisherman’s vocation, and the peculiarities of the curing trade, the profits to those concerned can in no way stand reduction, however much they may require increase.

The opinion of the foreign merchants on this matter has been manifested many times. On the 7th of March 1844, Messrs Robinow & Sons, and Hudtwalcker & Co., of Hamburg, write as follows:—

“We believe ourselves entitled to state that we are not merely expressing our own individual sentiments, but, at the same time, those of the public in general interested in the herring trade of the Continent. The official interference of the Board will prove a great benefit to the Scotch herring trade. It will, on the one hand, prove to the buyers on the Continent that the Board of Fisheries is desirous to do all in its power to justify the renowned fame of its brands, and in this way give more confidence to the trade. On the other hand, the curers of Scotland will be influenced by such steps to pay as much attention to the curing and packing as possible, and thus increasing confidence on the part of consumers, and increasing vigilance, with a view to improve the cure, on the part of the curers and officers, will conjointly contribute to increase the consumption of Scotch herrings on the Continent, and consequently to increase the exportation.”

Mr Wellmann, of Stettin, a very extensive foreign purchaser of the Caithness branded herrings, in a letter to Mr George Traill, M.P. for the county, wrote thus on the 8th of February 1851:—

“Scotch herrings are only sold in small quantities in this market and the neighbourhood; they are chiefly sent great distances of from a hundred to eight hundred miles English, into the interior of Germany and Poland, either by orders or offers, without the assistance of commission merchants, for the great expense of forwarding them does not permit any commission to a third party. The great distance prevents, likewise, dealers from inspecting the herrings on the spot here, who therefore make their purchases solely on their trust in the official brand, knowing that the fish must be selected well, and properly cured,—that the barrels be of legal size,—and that they require to be well and tightly made before the brand can be affixed. These herrings are generally forwarded by crafts, which are often six or eight weeks on their passage, and it frequently happens that a great fall in the market takes place during that time; and should the official brand be removed, dealers in the interior might easily take advantage of such falls, for it would not be difficult to find complaints—such, for instance, that the fish were not properly selected or well cured—that they had too much or too little salt—or that the barrels were of a smaller size (for no one can there say of what size the barrels require to be); and as most herrings are sold on credit, they would consequently be often stored at the risk and the expense of the shipper, and perhaps in markets where the person who purchased them was the only dealer.... The cheapness and the improved cure have increased the importation of Scotch herrings into our port to a great extent, for there is no port to which more Scotch herrings are shipped than Stettin, whilst the importation of Dutch and Norwegian fish has diminished.”

A body of Hamburg merchants, too numerous to be here named, stated, on the 4th of October 1852, that it is by the careful observance of the regulations established and enforced by the Board of Fisheries, that the Scotch herring trade has attained to its present magnitude:—

“It is by the crown full brand,” they observe, “that we enter into contracts, make sales and deliveries, without examination. Such herrings pass current from hand to hand here, and into the interior, some of them reaching the empire of Austria. The many thousand barrels of full crown branded herrings arrived this season have given entire satisfaction to us and our constituents; but the sale of unbranded herrings is frequently the subject of complaint, and threats made by customers to return the herrings. We are, therefore, compelled to make abatements in the price.”

The partners of four merchant firms of Berlin expressed themselves thus, on the 7th of October 1852:—“We hereby represent our entire confidence in the official brand applied to the Scotch herrings by the officers of the Board of Fisheries, which is our only guarantee for the large capital we embark in this business.” And the heads of six mercantile houses of Magdeburg state, within a few days of that time, in respect to a rumour which had reached them regarding the possible abolition of the brand: “An alteration in this respect would put us to the greatest inconvenience, and compel us to adopt another plan of payment, which in the end would not be agreeable to your merchants and curers.... The opinion of a body of merchants, importing annually 50,000 to 60,000 barrels of Scotch herrings, will be worth some consideration, particularly as the object concerns the interests of both parties.”

Mr Thalberg, another Prussian merchant, has recently (in 1855) written as under:—

“In order to show how the Scotch herrings had risen in the Dantzic market, while in 1841 only from 3000 to 4000 barrels were imported, last year there were 35,000, and Scotch herrings were gradually more and more taken into the interior, while Norwegian herrings have correspondingly decreased. The same was the fact at Königsberg. This he attributed to the brand. Some of the herrings were actually sent to the Black Sea, being bought at Dantzic on the faith of the brand, which was so essential to a continuance and spread of the trade, that he did not believe purchasers from the interior would come such a distance and examine the barrels for themselves, were the brand abolished. Norwegian herrings were sent in small yachts, and each parcel was examined with the greatest minuteness before being purchased.”

These are the opinions of foreign merchants on this important point. The following may be taken as expressing the sentiments of those at home. Mr James Methuen, of Leith, a skilful curer, extensively known as of great experience, and very largely embarked in the export trade, very recently wrote as follows:—

“It is impossible to see each herring in a barrel, therefore inspection of them at the time of curing and packing enables an officer to brand with knowledge of the article, and gives confidence to the purchaser.

“The official brand has proved the means of exchange by bill of lading from hand to hand, and from dealer to dealer, in Scotland,—afloat in the middle of the North Sea,—in the Baltic, or in the rivers of Germany in their river craft, and up the interior of Germany for hundreds of miles,—and been passed and paid for as a good bill of exchange—in some cases through half-a-dozen purchasers.

“I ask those who differ, would it be wise of Parliament to peril the industry of so many thousands of our seafaring and industrious population, for want of the supervision that has wrought so well as to displace the demand for Norwegian and Dutch cured herrings on the continent of Europe, and enhanced the value of the Scotch crown branded herrings, so that they are now bought and sold without inspection by parties who never, and cannot, see them.”[28]

The important fact previously stated by Mr Wellmann, in regard to the increasing consumption of Scotch herrings in the Baltic, and the consequently decreased importation from other quarters, is well shown by the following table:—

In 1834, barrels of Dutch herrings received at Stettin, 4,546 „ „ of Norwegian do., „ „ 53,981 „ „ of Scotch do., „ „ 19,960 ——————— In 1850, „ of Dutch do., „ „ 568 „ „ of Norwegian do., „ „ 12,507 „ „ of Scotch do., „ „ 116,538

In the year 1849, our exportation to Stettin amounted to 147,103 barrels. That season is well known to have been the most productive of herrings of any ever “recorded in history,” and so gave us the power, while Prussia afforded the opportunity, of this most beneficial exportation. It gives us sincere pleasure to add, that the immediately preceding season of 1855, although by no means the greatest in respect of capture, has exceeded all its predecessors in exportation to the Prussian markets—154,961 barrels having been transmitted to Stettin during the year now closed. Almost the whole of that vast consignment was ordered in consequence of the certain guarantee afforded by the crown brand. Now that peace is ere long, as we trust, about to be proclaimed, it is pleasant to anticipate the fresh impulse which may be given to the consumption of our native produce in many inland countries of the Continent. The disastrous, though, from the cruel necessities of war, advisable destruction of the great Russian fisheries, will no doubt, for a time, cause additional recourse to our marine resources; but the absence of the well-known and long-trusted brand from our barrels exported to the Baltic, would assuredly tend to check, or render less likely, that desirable increase.[29]

It is thought by many considerate and well-instructed people, by bankers and men of business, whether merchants or otherwise, that the power of obtaining the brand is of great advantage to young men of small means, and not yet established commercial reputation, who desire to enter into the export herring trade. By attending carefully to the cure of, it may be, only a few hundred barrels, they obtain the brand, and can ship their small stock with as good a prospect of a fair proportional profit as the most wealthy and best-known exporter. This opens a door to rising integrity and intelligence which might otherwise be closed, and it lessens the occasional evils of those engrossing monopolies which the large command of capital or credit is apt to produce, to the disadvantage of the poorer though not less trustworthy trader.