n6 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE -Sir R.
De Burgho, which you describe put up in the mill race, either above or below the wheel ?—
Bart.
^0> j have never seen one.
8~M g~ 1824.
Are you aware that there was a clause in what is called Lord Eliot's
Act, .the
Act of 1842, enacting that a grating should be placed in all water¬ courses diverted from rivers, to prevent salmon trout or fry from entering therein ?—Yes;
I have given a great deal of attention to that clause.
1825.
Are you aware that that clause was expunged from the Act, in Com¬ mittee, in consequence of the representations of millowners in Ireland, who said that it would be very destructive to their interests ?—I
am : I have been informed that it was expunged through their representations.
1826.
Do not you cpnsider that at any time of the year lattices or gratings put up in that way would materially affect the supply of water to the mills ?—
I am not a miller, but really I think that they could be so arranged as not to injure the motive power.
1827.
How could they be so arranged ?—I
think that they could be put, for example, on a pivot, so that if an unequal pressure came on either end it would give way and turn round, and so allow the leaves, or whatever accumula¬ tion was there, to pass on.
Now that would do no harm to the mill wheel, for the lattice revolving could never collect such a quantity of rubbish as would impede the water.
1828.
Chairman.]
There are no leaves or rubbish of that kind at the time when fish are coming down the river ?—No.
1829.
Mr.
Bourke.]
Supposing you put a grating in the river at any time of the year, do not you imagine that in a short time it would get completely choked up; a grating two inches wide ?—Yes,
but I say that if there were an axle permitting the grating to turn round on a certain accumulation coming against it, you would do away with the injury of its being a permanent barrier against the leaves.
i 830.
Has the experiment been tried ?—I
cannot say that it has been tried ; it is merely an idea of my own.
1831.
Chairman?^
Has it not been done in England ?—I
am not aware.
1832.
Are there not mill races upon rivers in England which do not destroy the fish ?—I
understand there are.
1833.
You perhaps are aware that competent persons,'persons themselves millers, or who have been millers, have given it as their opinion that that may be done ?—I
have heard millers say that it may.
1834.
Mr.
Bourke.]
At the same time you are aware of the principal fact, which is, that this clause containing the recommendation which you have men¬ tioned in your evidence was struck out of Lord Eliot's Act in consequence of the representations of a great number of millowners in Ireland ?—-Yes.
i 835.
Chairman.]
A great many amendments were made in the Bill by the striking out of clauses on the representations of parties having private interests ?
—Yes, there were.
1836.
There, were a vast number of clauses, for instance, imposing minimum penalties, which were struck out at the instance of weir owners ?—Yes.
1837.
Other clauses affecting mills were struck out at the instance of millers ?
—Yes.
1838.
A great number of amendments of that character were made ; and do you think that the Bill, as Lord Eliot prepared it, or as it was passed into a law, in respect of these matters at least, was the most satisfactory?—I
think that Lord Eliot's was ; his Bill was prepared with a great deal of care.
1839.
Captain Archdall.]
You stated that you thought that the constabulary force of Ireland might be effectively employed in removing obstructions, but that they were not sufficiently numerous for the preservation of the fisheries ?
—So I think.
1840.
But do not you think that they might be advantageously permitted to prevent the illegal destruction of fish when it came under their notice ?—There
is an amendment to the 5th & 6th Victoria which was enacted for that purpose, but however they have never entered into the spirit of that amendment.
1841.
Chairman.]
The Acts which have been passed for the preservation of the fisheries have, I think, generally proceeded on the principle of giving powers and not compelling parties to exercise those powers?—Yes;
not compelling the execution of them.
1842.
I asked you a question on the last occasion as to prosecutions under
the
