Daily Kennebec journal., 1879-02-07
Remarks OF Judge Goddard on the New
POrgie Bill.

At the final hearing before the Committee
on Fisheries, in the Hall of the House, on
Tuesday L. NJ. January 2e, Judge Goddard
made the closing argument i'm behalf of the
petitioners.
He said that the fishermen of Maine only
asked for suitable protection against their
natural enemies, the porgy steamers. For
the past eight years those cormorants from
Massachusetts and Rhode Island have infested
not only our coast, but our bays, harbors and
rivers, preying upon our shore fishery with
out molestation. Last year our fishermen
preferred very modest request, quite too
modest which the Committee of 1873
was pleased to refuse, but the Legislature in
its wisdom, reversed the Committees action,
although the remonstrants succeeded in
bringing sufficient influence to bear upon
the Senate at the last moment to procure an
amendment which deferred the promised re-
lief, and left our fishermen to suffer for an
other year Not content with that the
steamer interest threatened them with re-
peal of the law this year. But the will of
the people of the eight shore counties was so
Enthusiastically manifested at the last election
that our adversaries suddenly became re-
conciled to the law of 1873, and are now
straining every nerve to defeat the amendment
which has been found necessary for the eff
fectual protection of their ancient and useful
occupation. While this is substantially ad-
mitted, il is little remarkable that neither
the witnesses nor the counsel for the remon-
strants have uttered a word in specific oppo-
sition to the main, and l may say, the only
question at issue before you--the amend
ment for which your petitioners pray, the
extension of the prohibition of those steamers
for an additional mile.
Although we have listened to "A good deal
of testimony and to four arguments perhaps
! ought TO say fiye), there has been silence
on this main point. We may therefore fairly
claim that our opponents substantially con-
cede that unless you are convinced that the
Law OF 1878 ought TO be repealed, the amend
ment for which we this year petition cannot
justly be refused.
Some of the committee will remember that
last year II was not seriously denied that fish
had been getting scarce upon our coasts. but
the decrease was attributed to other causes
than the dcprcdations of the steamers This
year the remonstrants are more desperate and
make bold TO assert that fish are plentier than
ever. Ii is true that some of their witnesses
have the grace to admit that the shore fishery
has declined, and that our fishermen have
been impoverished and driven from the State
even as far as Washington Territory. but thi.
disaster they attribute TO the British Treaty
Of 1871. for which we have just had to pay
81 800, 900.
Now we take issue with them on this state
ment, and we appeal both to the oycrwhclm-
ing weight of the testimony before YOU and TO
the personal knowledge of many Of the com
mittee.
The honorable chairman knows that fish
hare grown scarce since the advent Of the
porgy steamers, and in proportion TO the frc-
qucney OF their visitations. For more than
thirty years nave been IN the habit OF sailinu
IN my own boat from Frenchman', Bav 10
Cape Cod, and ! kaor that fish are NOT A.
plenty as they once were. In 1919 encoun.
tered an immense school of porgies Al tho
Gurnet in Harpsweil. The noise which thn,,
made IN their passage through the Gurnct
bridge into New Meadows River resembled
the rush Of the mid-tide, and was heard for
more than a mile. You could scoop the,n mn
in buckets, and the next morning saw a man
pitching them into a cart from the flats of a
cove on the Great Island where acres of tl,em
lay stranded. have neither seen nor heard
of such schools Of fish since the por.y steam
ers came among us. j. it a mere coincidence
or is it plain case Of cause and effect
The disappearance of our fish co-incides
with the appearance OF those steamers i'm our
bays about the same way that drunkennc,.
comedies with the excessive use ofintoxica,-
ing liqaors. ask you if the testimony toes
not prove that the operations and maneuvres
OF those steamers are not admirably ADAPTED
20 frighten from our bays and from our coast
such fish as they fail to catch. think those
who are familiar with the habits of fish will
have no doubt of it.
But the junior counsel answers that large
capital isinyested in the porgy steam fishery,
that . large number of factories have beer
been built in several towns and that nearly
1900 men arr employed. / am glad TO know
that his clients are SO prosperous, but the sue
cess Of tlsose companies does not reconcile the
shore fishermen to the destruction of their
only means of subsistence. If the amend
Ineaf proposed to sweep the steamers from