Again, in the 21st section, regulating the weekly close time, it is enacted “That any person acting in contravention of this section shall forfeit all the fish taken by him, and any net or movable instrument used by him in taking the same, and, in addition thereto, shall incur a penalty of not exceeding five pounds, and a further penalty of not exceeding one pound for each fish.”  But in the 17th section, which regulates the annual close time, though there is a penalty for the contravention and forfeiture of the Salmon so taken, there is no forfeiture of nets and implements.  You will no doubt remember how this worked when the watchers took a net and boat, near Preston, last season, after the setting in of the annual close time.  How the owner of the net and boat came to claim them, on the pretence that the net had been stolen from the bank, where it had been left to dry, although his own men were the parties who were so illegally using them.

Minimum penalties.—­I see no mention of them in the new bill, although it is notorious that many magistrates have fined convicted poachers in the penalty of a farthing or a shilling.  What is this but an encouragement to do so again?

Close time for Trout.—­This is greatly needed in Salmon rivers, as it is well known that many a poacher pretends to be fishing for Trout when he is looking after Salmon.  This is doubly needed when the Salmon ascend the small tributaries to spawn.

The right of way for water bailiffs.—­There is no clause or section in the new bill giving the right of way on the banks of Salmon rivers to duly authorized persons without their being deemed guilty of trespass.  But there is one by which they are permitted to examine weirs.  There is on my part no objection to this examination, but why are millowners stigmatized by being subjected to exceptional legislation?  Are not the gamekeepers of gentlemen who have many miles of river subject to no surveillance on the part of the water bailiffs as likely to act illegally as the servants of the millowners?  Let both be watched with equal care, and I do not mind how vigilant the watching may be; but I do object to being made the object of special and exceptional legislation.  The tax ought to be upon nets and rods and other implements in proportion to their value.  But if a tax is laid on the extent of the fishery, we may bid adieu to voluntary subscriptions.

In conclusion, if Mr. Eden comes into this district, I think it ought to be distinctly intimated to him that no bill would be satisfactory to the upper proprietors which did not give them a greater interest in the increase and improvement of rivers.  There are three ways of doing this.  The mesh of the Salmon net might be enlarged from eight to twelve inches round.  This would allow grilse to pass, and fill the river with breeding fish.  Or, secondly, the weekly close time might be extended so as to include Friday as well as Saturday afternoon and Sunday.