(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Annual report of the Commissioners of Inland Fisheries made to the General Assembly"

HARVARD UNIVERSITY. 




L I B li A R Y 



MUSEUM or OOMPAEATIVE ZOOLOGY. 

§141^ 



h 



irvvAA'vv^AAjurvaAA-. 




\v,\^\:l. 




Butt at W^^ohe Isimxh m\h l^tomhsnts Plantations, 
FORTY-SECOND ANNUAL REPORT 

OF THE 

COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND 
FISHERIES, 



Compliments of the 

Commissioners of Inland Fisheries, 



A 



PKOVli:)ENCE. R. 1. 

K. L. KKEKMAN C03JPANY, PRINTERS. 
1912. 



^tnU of U^ahi Mimxh m\h l^vomhenn piantatioits. 
FORTY-SECOND ANNUAL REPORT 

OF THE 

COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND 
FISHERIES, 

MADE TO THE 

GENERAL ASSEMBLY 

AT ITS 

January Session, 1912. 



fr pj 



MiOVlDEXCE, R. I. 

K. L. FKEKMAN COMPANY, PKINTERS. 
1912. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

Charles W. Willard, Westerly, President. 
William H. Boardman, Central Falls, Vice President. 
William P. Morton, Providence, Secretary. 
Adelbert D. Roberts, Woonsocket, Auditor. 
Isaac H. Clarke, Jamestown, Treasurer. 
Daniel B. Fearing, A. M., Newport. 
William R. Rose, Tiverton. 



DEPUTY COMMISSIONERS. 

William T. Luth, Newport, Chief Deputy. 
James Harrington, Newport. 
J. B. Allen, New Shoreham. 
A. V. Willis, New Shoreham. 



SUPERINTENDENT OF HATCHERY AND EXPERIMENT STATION. 
Earnest W. Barnes, Wickford. 



CONTENTS. 



Page. 

Personnel of the Inland Fisheries Board iv 

General Report for 1911 1 

Financial Statement 4 

Chapter I. Stocking of Fresh- Water Ponds and Streams 6 

General Considerations 6 

Need of a Fresh- Water Hatchery 6 

Trout and Black Bass, 1911 7 

Landlocked Salmon 8 

Introduction into Rhode Island Waters 8 

Outline of Natural History 10 

Chapter II. Collection of Data and Statistics Relating to the Commercial 

Fisheries 12 

General Condition of the Fisheries 12 

Tables of Shipment of Sea Products from Newport 13, 14 

Lobster Industry 15 

Comparative Table of Number of Pounds and Number of Pots, 

1904-1911 15 

Classified Table of Number of Pounds of Lobsters, 1904-1911 16 

Number of Boats, Pots and Men Engaged in Rhode Island, 1911 . . 17 
Chart showing the Extension of State Lines in Watch Hill 
District. 

List of Lobster Licenses Granted 18 

Beam Trawhng 27 

Salt Water Line-Fishing 27 

Fish Traps Set in Rhode Island, 1911 28 

Table of Number and General Distribution since 1908 29 

List of Traps and Owners, 1911 30 

Block Island Traps 30 

Watch Hill Traps 30 

Off-Shore Traps 30 



VI CONTENTS. 

Chart I, Block Island Traps. 
Chart II, Watch Hill Traps. 
Chart III, Narragansett Bay Traps. 

Other Traps 32 

Deep-Water Fishing off Newport, 1911 35 

Table VII, Calendar of Soup Season, 1905-1911 37 

Table VIII, Calendar of Mackerel Season, 1905-1911 37 

Table IX, Appearance of "Tinker" Mackerel, 1905-1911 38 

Table X, Catch of Squiteague in Soup Traps, 1905-1911 38 

Table XI, First Appearance of Various Marketable Fish in Traps 

off Newport, 1905-1911 38 

Hon. D. B. Fessing's Collection of R. I. Fishes 39 

Chapter III. Enforcement of State Laws 40 

List of Prosecutions 40 

Summary of Supreme Court Decision on Lobster License Law 41 

Changes made in the Fisheries Laws 42 

Chapter IV. Physical and Biological Conditions of Narragansett Bay. . 43 

Chart showing Average Weekly Temperature of Air and Sea Water 
at Wickford, 1911. 

Chapter V. The Dissemination of Information Concerning the Aquatic 

Resources of the State 44 

Chapter VI. Co-operation with other Fisheries Authorities 45 

Chapter VII. Propagation of Lobsters at the Wickford Experiment 

Station 46 

Chapter VIII. Propagation of Marine Fisheries 48 

The Winter Flounder 48 

Appendix 

A. The Decision of the Suijreme Court in State vs. Constantine 
Kofines et al 49 

B. List of Federal and State Fisheries Authorities, 1911 78 

C. Titles of Special Papers PubUshed by the Commissioners of 
Inland Fisheries, 1897-1912 87 



2 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

Commissioners was morally obligated to protect these legally licensed 
lobstermen from the encroachments of the non-licensed or unscrupu- 
lous fishermen. Furthermore, when it is recalled that not only the 
laws governing the lobster industry, but those regulating many 
branches of the general fisheries as well are dependent for their 
enforcement upon the Commissioners of Inland Fisheries, the chaotic 
state which would have resulted in our fisheries from the failure to 
appoint deputies to enforce the laws can readily be imagined. The 
Commissioners, therefore, acting under the advice of the attorney- 
general and prominent members of the legislature, continued to em- 
ploy their deputies. As will be seen in the Chapter on the " Enforce- 
ment of the State Laws," a number of violators of the law were 
brought to justice. This, however, does not correctly represent the 
work of the deputies, as it is obviously of greater importance to pre- 
vent lawlessness than to punish lawbreakers. 

At the Wickford hatchery a continuance of a large portion of the 
work as a matter of economy and conservation was imperative. The 
egg lobsters, which had been purchased the preceding fall and had been 
cared for and fed through the winter in order to obtain an early supply 
of fry for the use of the Commissioners at their hatchery, were near 
the point of hatching their eggs. To have released them would 
have entailed a loss to the State not only in the time and expense 
of providing and keeping them, but in the still greater loss in the 
failure to conclude the experiment. At the expense of weeks of labor 
by the superintendent and his men, the lobster rearing plant had been 
overhauled and placed in readiness for the opening of the season. 
Additional apparatus, consisting of new gears, shafting, rafts and cars, 
had been added with a view of largely increasing the output of young 
lobsters. The launches, boats and all paraphernalia had been put 
in good condition. In fact the entire station had been put in such 
state as would amply warrant more efficient and economical opera- 
tion and an increase over the output of any previous year. It is 
necessary, each year, that all this work shall be done weeks in advance 
in order to handle the lobsters when their eggs are ready for hatching. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 3 

Also in order to secure the services of efficient employees during the 
time when the Commission needs them most, they must be hired 
in advance. This your Commission had done. 

In view of the above facts it would have been an obviously unwise 
and even a censorable act to have abandoned the work, discharged 
all employees and have allowed the buildings and apparatus to 
suffer from lack of care. Furthermore, the entire winter's prepara- 
tory work and such experiments as had been carried on through the 
winter, or for even longer, would have resulted not only in loss of 
money expended, but also in the loss of the valuable experiments 
themselves. 

After careful consideration the Commission decided to carry on 
the work under somewhat restricted conditions. Employees were 
notified that funds were exhausted, that it would be necessary to 
reduce the force to the smallest possible number and that even those 
retained would continue largely at their own risk as the Commis- 
sioners would be able to advance from their private fund only a 
portion of their salary. Under this arrangement the superintendent 
and one man was retained throughout the season as absolutely nec- 
essary and during the height of the season another assistant was 
employed for a time. No egg lobsters were thereafter received, 
excepting such as were voluntarily furnished to the Commission by 
the fishermen themselves who assumed all risk of payment therefor. 
These, with the lobsters that were carried through the winter and 
such as were purchased prior to the veto of the appropriation fur- 
nished the eggs for the obviously restricted use of the hatchery. 

A detailed account of the year's work of the Commission will be 
found under the different headings* in the main body of the report, 
and has followed the usual lines, subject to the restrictions mentioned 
above. As a very brief summary of the work it may be said 
that: 

*A table of contents will be found in the front of this report which will greatly facilitate the 
finding of special topics. 



4 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

Approximately eighty million flatfish fry were hatched at the 
Wickford station and liberated in suitable waters of the State. 

Three hundred thousand lobsters, in round numbers, were reared 
to the bottom-seeking stages. 

Twenty thousand landlocked salmon eggs for which arrangements 
had been made prior to the veto of the appropriation, were hatched, 
reared to the fingerling stage and distributed in suitable lakes in the 
State. 

Your Commission is very much pleased at the recent decision of 
the supreme court sustaining the constitutionality of the lobster 
license law. (A brief summary of this decision will be found in the 
report under the heading "Enforcement of State Laws," and a re- 
print of the decision will be found in the appendix at the close of the 
report.) 

Occasion is here taken to thank the New York, New Haven and 
Hartford Railroad Company for its courtesy in granting free trans- 
portation of fry and messengers. 

The financial statement for the year 1911 is as follows: 

State of Rhode Island in account with the Commissioners of Inland 

Fisheries. 

DEBIT. 
1911. 

Mar, 15. To expenses of the Commissioners from Jan- 
uary 1 to March 15 $200 80 

To expenses and services of deputies under the 

law from January 1 to March 15 394 75 

To expenses at laboratory from January 1 to 

March 15 557 39 

$1,152 94 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 5 

CREDIT. 
1911. 

Mar. 15. By received from the State Treasurer $1,152 94 



Amount received for 321 lobster licenses, at $5.00 each, 

as per receipts from the State Treasurer. . 1,605 00 

Respectfully submitted, 

CHAS. W. WILLARD, 
WILLIAM H. BOARDMAN, 
DANIEL B. FEARING, 
ADELBERT ROBERTS, 
ISAAC H. CLARKE, 
WM. P. MORTON. 



6 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

CHAPTER I. 

THE STOCKING OF PONDS AND STREAMS WITH FRESH- 
WATER FISHES. 

In view of the moderate amount of money that has been expended 
in past years for restocking the lakes, ponds and streams of the State, 
and for the enforcement of protective laws, your Commission believes 
that the fresh-water fisheries will compare favorably with those of 
adjoining states. Aside from the amount paid for the annual dis- 
tribution of brook trout, no money has been expended in the purchase 
of fresh-water fishes for many years. However, through the courtesy 
of the United States Bureau of Fisheries in furnishing several con- 
signments of black bass, and through the personal efforts of members 
of the Commission who from time to time have transferred adult 
fish from one pond or stream to another, other species besides the 
brook trout have received wide distribution with very gratifying 
results. 

Systematic Investigation of Our Fresh-Water. 

Your Commission beheves that the time has come when a more 
systematic investigation should be made of the fresh-water fisheries 
of Rhode Island with a view to the introduction into our ponds and 
streams of such species as will furnish not only sport to the angler, 
but will also provide a supply of food fish for the large and constantly 
increasing army of working people to whom a few pounds of fish 
caught after the day 's work is over, means, besides the pleasure and 
recreation, a saving of the price of a meal for the family. 

A Fresh -Water Hatchery Needed. 

With the exception of Rhode Island, all of the New England States 
own their hatcheries for one or more varieties of fresh-water fishes. 
Your Commission does not believe it necessary, expedient, or a matter 
of economy for the State to own and operate a hatchery for brook 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 7 

trout, as the American Fish Culture Co., at Carolina, R. I., owns one 
of the best equipped and most successful trout hatcheries in the 
country and has always made favorable terms to the Commission 
for its annual requisitions of fish for restocking purposes. 

In regard to black bass, however, the situation is entirely different. 
The Commission receives annually many requests for distribution 
of this very valuable species of food fish, but the majority of these 
requests could not be granted owing to the extreme difficulty in 
obtaining anywhere near an adequate supply. Nearly all the govern- 
ment and commercial black bass hatcheries are located at remote 
distances and, considering prices for fish of suitable size and expenses 
of transportation, the outlay is almost prohibitive. 

Your Commission believes that if the State could own or lease a 
small pond near to its Experiment Station so that the supervision 
and necessary work could be done by our superintendent and his 
employees, a comparatively small initial outlay and annual expendi- 
ture would provide an output of young black bass and perch that 
would be ample for present needs. 

With the increasing popularity of outdoor pursuits — of which 
fishing plays an important part — and with the growing facilities of 
trolleys, automobiles, motorcycles, etc., affording easy access to 
remote ponds, comes the necessity for extra effort along the lines 
of propagation and restocking and the need of rigid enforcement of 
protective laws. 

TROUT AND BLACK BASS IN 1911. 

It has been the custom of your Commission to expend annually 
a portion of its appropriation for the restocking of the streams and 
lakes of the State with trout and black bass. While the Commission 
is still of the opinion that such expense is fully warranted, yet, owing 
to the lack of appropriation of funds and to the fact that there would 
be no actual moneyed loss to the State by omitting this work, it was 
early decided that this branch of work would not be continued this 
year. 



8 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

It is confidently expected that the usual natural increase in black 
bass in those waters which have been stocked by your Commission 
will be considerably augumented by the changes in the State law that 
were recommended by the Commission and were passed at the last 
session. This change protects both the immature and the spawn 
fish by restricting the legal length to those over ten inches and making 
it illegal to possess black bass between January 1st and July 1st. 

LANDLOCKED SALMON. 
INTRODUCTION INTO RHODE ISLAND WATERS. 

As early as 1876 an attempt was made by your Commission to 
introduce landlocked salmon into Rhode Island waters. Since then 
occasional efforts (about six in number) have been made, the last in 
1900. That these attempts were not attended with as good results 
as might be desired was due, no doubt, to two general reasons. In 
the first place, requiring, as this fish does, low temperature of water 
and suitable inlets, few ponds or lakes in Rhode Island seem to possess 
these qualities. On the other hand, occasional catches have revealed 
the fact that some of the fish which were planted have lived and 
thrived and perhaps it is not unjust to say that our local fishermen 
have not employed suitable methods of capture. At any rate your 
Commission was not convinced that the experiments had been as 
thorough as possible. It was therefore decided late in 1910 to make 
another attempt, using the fingerling size, instead, as was most often 
the case in previous attempts, of using fry. Twenty thousand eggs 
were obtained through the courtesy of the United States Bureau of 
Fisheries and were hatched and reared to fingerlings with small loss 
by the American Fish Culture Company. These were distributed 
to those ponds which seem best adapted to the requirements of 
landlocked salmon. 

With the hope of creating interest in this fish and for the benefit 
of those who are not acquainted with its peculiarities, a cut is inserted 
and a few general facts are given in regard to its habits and natural 
history. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 




10 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

THE LANDLOCKED SALMON. 

{Salmo salar sebago). 

Plate No. 1. 

The old salmon of the sea who begat thee long ago in these inland 
waters became a backslider, descending again to the ocean, and grew 
gross and heavy with coarse feeding. But thou, unsalted salmon of the 
foaming floods, not land-locked as men call thee, but choosing of thine 
own free will to dwell on a loftier level in the pure, swift current of a 
living stream, hath groivn in grace and risen to a better life."- — Henry 
Van Dyke. 

A Variety of the Atlantic Salmon. — The landlocked salmon is gen- 
erally conceded, at the present time, to be a variety of the Atlantic 
salmon (Salmo salar), and not a distinct species. In fact, so slight and 
uncertain are the structural differences between the two forms, that 
descriptive text books either avoid a statement or give only general 
differences. Among these the most pronounced are: 

Absence, in the landlocked form, of the instinct to migrate to 
the sea. 

The adult of the landlocked variety is smaller than the Atlantic 
adult and resembles quite closely the "grilse" or adolescent stage of 
the Atlantic salmon with the tail usually a little wider and the dorsal 
or back fin somewhat higher. 

The coloring is a little more pronounced in the landlocked speci- 
mens and when they are fresh from the water the sheen on the back 
and sides is much greater. 

It has often been pointed out that the differences are such as might 
have been brought about by a somewhat unnatural confinement in 
fresh water. The usually accepted theory is that long ago some 
natural phenomena barred the return of the salmon to the sea and 
in consequence of this necessitated change of habits and environ- 
ment, the differences between them and the parent form were brought 
about. It is pointed out that the habits of the Atlantic salmon in 
ascending as it does almost impassible falls in order to reach fresh 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 11 

water and spawn, coupled with the fact that the fry pass the first year or 
two of their hfe in fresh water, would make such a landlocking possible. 
In mining operations on the Pacific coast the Pacific salmon have 
often been artificially landlocked and in these cases have lived and 
spawned. On the other hand in certain lakes where the landlocked 
salmon exist that are not at the present time cut off from the sea, 
there seems to be no evidence that such interruption of water passage 
has taken place, and it is often difficult to see just how such conditions 
could occur. 

Geographical Distribution. — The only known natural occurrences 
of landlocked salmon are in the lakes of North Eastern America and 
certain lakes in Sweden. In the United States they are found only 
in the lakes of Maine and are known as the Sohoodic or Sebago 
landlocked salmon. The Canadian form differs a little from the 
Maine variety, and is known as the "ouananiche." 

The Sebago salmon has been quite widely distributed throughout 
New England by artificial introduction. 

Habitat. — The clear cool water of deep lakes is the environment 
most adapted to the landlocked salmon. They have been known to 
endure a temperature of over 80°, but refused to eat when the tem- 
perature became over 75°. 

Reproduction. — The spawning season occurs between October and 
November. The fish usually select a place where the water is shallow 
and rapid and the bottom gravelly. In different lakes both incoming 
and outgoing currents have been selected. The eggs are heavy and 
non-adhesive and are slightly over one-quarter inch in diameter. 
The average numlDer of eggs per fish is about 1,500, and manj^ as 
4,000 to 5,000 have been obtained from one fish. The eggs hatch 
in about 1G9 days at a temperature of 37°. 

Food. Carnivorous. Usually insects and small fish. 

Size. The average size is about three pounds. The largest on 
record was a male caught at Sel^ago Lake which was said to weigh 
27 pounds. 



12 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

Game Qualities. As a game fish the landlocked salmon is said to 
surpass the larger Atlantic salmon and give splendid sport to the 
fly fisherman as "they jump high and often and are very strong for 
their size." Nearly all sportsmen who are experienced with them 
attest the fact that they are wise and warj^ The same flies and 
tactics cannot always be reUed upon. Trolling with the "phantom 
minnow," or with the "spoon," must often be resorted to. The best 
time for fly fishing for landlocked salmon is in the early spring. 



CHAPTER II. 



THE COLLECTION OF DATA AND STATISTICS RELATING 
TO THE COMMERCIAL FISHERIES. 

Your Commission has spared no effort to make the data contained 
in this chapter as accurate as possible. It must however be borne in 
mind that some of the data is far from complete. It is regrettable 
that some such legislation as exists in neighboring states has not been 
passed in our State that will make this valuable portion of the work 
of the Commission complete and accurate. Numerous requests, both 
from this country and abroad, have been received, requesting data in 
regard to the commercial fisheries of Rhode Island, and while we have 
replied as best we could, still, in certain cases, our answers were only 
approximately correct. 

GENERAL CONDITION OF THE FISHERIES. 

In general, the fishing season in Rhode Island waters was very 
poor in 191L Among the "stub" trap fishermen within the bay the 
season started well, but the catches soon diminished. Off Newport 
the appearance of various fishes was late and although there was 
a considerable variety, the runs were not very large. Around 
Block Island, swordfish and bluefish were more plentiful this year 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



13 



than usual and in the latter part of the summer the horsemackerel 
could be seen leapmg out of the water almost any daj'. 

The following tables of the shipment of sea products from Ne\vi3ort 
are submitted as heretofore : 

Table I. 

Table Showing the Amount of Fish, Lobsters, and Other Sea Products Shipped 

Monthly from Neivport by the Principal Transportation Companies 

During the Year 1911. 























ja 


















c 










ua 












2 
^ 


. 


2 


0) 




00 


o 


»; 


o 


m 
•3 


.s 


c; 


1911. 


E 


q 




3 


3 
02 


V 




3 
Eh 






a 

3 
O 
CO 


c 
o 
O 


2 
1 
































o 


o 


o 


o 


0) 


O 03 






o 


Ui 




















"» s. 




"3 


"o 




o 


"» 


c 
















ti 














































1^ 












o; 












PC 


K 


CQ 


m 


•^ 


raw 


1< 


m 


m 


'A 


PQ 


pa 


pa 


January 

February 

March 


871 


8 


• 


90 




















587 


in 




94 




. 
















746 J 


2 


9 


71 




















April 

May 


1.196 
10 303 


15i 




42 










6 










243i 


4 


6 


19 








9 












12,659^ 


443 i 


8 




8 


3 


1 


* 


9 


86 








July. 


2.8111 


676 


15 




18 


6 




1 


1 


337 


1 








2,027i 


5881 


8 






40 


31 


3 


1 


81 


1 






September 


3,261 


235J 


9 


45 


3 


15 






9 




? 






2,644 
1,464 

1,168 


68 
8 


2 
1 
1 


97 

198 

83 


6 
2 


11 

4 






1 






30 
33 

8 
















December 












1 


Total, year 1911 


.39,141 


2,281^ 


50 


726 


56 


79 


32 


4J 


29 


509 


4 


71 


1 



14 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



Table No. 2. 

Table Showing Shipment of Fish, Lobsters, and Other Sea Products from Newport 
for the Last Twenty-five Years. 





4 


0) 

1 

1 


1 
Si 

3 
3 

C9 

m 


1 
1 

03 

m 


3 
ffl 


d 
1 

f 
1 
S3 
m 


§ 

1 

m 


i 

u 

II 

2; 


8 
m 

3 
Is 


£ 

Kg 

2 


3 

"a 
es 

m 


OS 

J3 
CO 

a 

3 


i 

o 
PM 
t4 

0) 

1 
3 


"a; 


1 


1 

o 
O 


3 


1887 


16,657 
15,033 
19,306 
8,933 
18,032 
26,832 
.24,452 
17,769 
24,622 
20,425 
52,098 
34,065 
34,917 
38,184 
50,500 
53,986 
54,384 
62,106 
50,127 
60,855 
59,674 
48,814 
46,031 
53,154 
39,141 


834 
1,161 
2,047 
2,650 
2,204 
2,123 
1,399 
2,392 
2,119 
1,728 
2,039 
1,163 
4,143 
4,793 
4,393 
4,342 
1,474 
1,921 

977 
1,306J 
1,529 
2,5171 
3,252J 

427 
2,281J 
































1888 
































1889 
































1890 
































1891 
































1892 
































1893 
































1894 
































1895 
































1896 












143 

45 

74 

162 

166 

21 

179 

164 

554 

723 

811 

263 

198 

61 

38 

509 




















1897 






























1898 






























1899 






























1900 






























1901 






























1902 


233 


1 

84 

45 
122 

17 
322 
287 
145 
112 

5C 


























1903 








11 

26 
11 
13 
3 
6 
17 
56 


79 
336 
91 
40 
112 
93 
21 
47 
79 
















1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

1910 

1911 


8 
80 
15 
12 
23 
14 
58 
29 


3 
2 

8 


23 

6 

24 

21 

29 

5 

4 














2 

1 

5 

5 

44 


1 

12 
12 
3 
5 
37 
32 


1 
1 












112 
18 






2 


18 


673 
794 
726 


42 
71 


5 
1- 










Total 


930,097 


55,226 [233 


1,18.J239 

j 


13 


112 


4,011 


143 


898! 17J 


101 


2,323 


113 


6- 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



15 



THE LOBSTER INDUSTRY. 

The lobster season of 1911 was slightly better than that of 1910. 
(See Tables III, IV and V, on pages 15, 16 and 17) . Not only was this 
true with reference to the total number of pounds marketed — ^which 
was approximately 60,000 pounds greater than in 1910 — but was 
noticeable also in the average number of pounds per lobster pot. 
In spite of the fact that there was an increase of over 1,200 pots set 
this past year, there was a gain of one pound per pot. Bait was a 
serious problem, especially in the early part of the season on account 
of the scarcity of "trash fish" in the traps. 

The following tables have been compiled from data furnished for 
the greater part by William T. Luth, Chief Deputy Lobster Com- 
missioner, and at the conclusion of these a list of the licensed lobster- 
men is given as prescribed by law: 

Table III. 

Table Comparing the Number of Pounds of Lobsters, Number of Pots, and Average 
Number of Pounds Per Pot, for the Years 1904-1911. 



Year. 



Total I I Average 

Catch in ! Newport. Number of Number of 
Pounds. Pots. Pounds 

! Per Pot. 



1904 376,994 

1905 I 449,3001 

1906 1 671,914' 

1907 929,423 

1908 i 1,471,344 

I 

1909 I 1,342,983 

1910 833,683 

1911 1 891,886 



226,994 


7,935 


45 


301,659 


9.180 


48 


353,573 


11,355 


59 


581,189 


12,104 


76 


665,009 


20,011 


73 


757,837 


23.220 


57 


489,815 


22,091 


^ 


513,076 


23.2941 


38 



16 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES 



Table IV. 
The Number of Pounds of Lobsters Caught in Rhode Island for the Years 1904-1911. 



Fish M.^hkets. 


1904. 1905. 1900. 


1907. 


1908. 


1909. 


1910. 


1911. 


Newport (wholesale) 

(retail) 


147,494 
79,500 


179,427 

122,232 

97,641 


245,860 
107,713 
163,341 


472,575 
108,614 
193,243 


524,746 
100,-263 
191,218 

286,724 


572,705 

185,132 

191,731 

91.107 


351,675 

148,140 

67,038 

60,785 


390.702 

132,374 

63,000 






84,000 


Block Island (wholesale) 1 

Narragansett Pier, | 
(wholesale) ', 

Watch Hill (wholesale).. 

Point Judith (wholesale) 


150,000 


100,000 


155,000 


155,000 




248,330 


236,000 
66,318 


160,300 
54,800 


159,000 


Point Judith (wholesale). ) 

1 

Watch Hill (wholesale) 1 








92,810 


Narragansett Pier, | 
(wholesale) 1 


1 












376,994 


499,300 


671,914 


929,432 


1,391,281 


1,342,993 


833,683 


891,886 




Chart showing Extension of State Lines in Watch Hill District. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



17 



Table V. 

Number of Pots, Boats and Men Engaged in Lobster Fishing in the State of Rhode 

Island for 1911. 



Location. 


Men. 


Boats. 


Pots. 




67 
7 
1 
4 
1 
1 
2 

12 
9 
5 

20 
120 
2 
2 
5 
1 
4 
2 
8 
7 

13 

10 
1 

15 
3 


41 
5 

31 
3 

1 
1 
2 
11 
8 
5 
18 
86 
2 
2 
5 
1 
3 
2 
5 
6 
8 
6 
1 
155 
2 


9,825 


Bristol *. 


248 


Castle Hill 


30 




120 




60 




20 




130 




511 




515 




182 




1,405 




6,306 




125 


Peacedale 


120 




205 




30 




105 




160 




322 




420 


Wakefield 


895 




365 


Watch Hill 


30 


Westerly 


1,110 


Wickford 


55 






Total ■. 


321 


240 


23.294 







*In addition to these about ten boats were fishing just beyond the three mile limit. The bulk 
of their lobsters were brought into Rhode Island. 



18 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

List of Lobster Licenses Granted in 1911. 

License 
No. Name. Location. 

1. Joseph L. Eaton Saunderstown. 

2. Joseph L. Eaton, Jr " 

3. Henry K. Littlefield Block Island. 

4. Victor D. Gray Tiverton. 

5. Samuel E. Gray " 

6. William H. Dodge Block Island. 

7. Louis E. Smith " 

8. EarleA. Smith : 

10. Arthur E. Dodge " 

11. Prentice A. Lanphear Westerly. 

12. Wilbur Elwin Dodge Block Island. 

13. George Addison Rose '' 

14. Daniel M. Thompson Prudence Island. 

15. Albert W. Smith Block Island. 

16. G.E.Smith 

17. S. A. Littlefield 

20. E. A. Hoxie 

21. John E. Littlefield 

22. Rouse B. Dodge 

23. O.L.Mitchell 

24. Simeon A. Ball " 

25. Vernie Willis 

26. Johannes Jacobson " 

28. Ethan Dodge 

30. Howard Fisher 

31. Thomas Norris Warren. 

32. Christian Nickelson Block Island. 

33. Dwight A. Dunn 

34. Jessie A. Lewis " 

36. Samuel B. Dickens " 

37. Arthur C. Dickens 

38. Albert S. Hayes 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. ' 19 

License 
No. Name. Location. 

39. Edgar Littlefield Block Island. 

41. S. Martin Rose, Jr 

42. Harry R. Seymore Warren. 

43. Albert L. Anderson Block Island. 

44. Wilson D. Maine Westerly. 

45. Gust Anderson Block Island. 

46. John Anderson " 

48. Arthur Earl Larkin Narragansett Pier. 

49. Christian Francis Newport. 

53. Stannos Janitos " 

54. Park A. Slate Block Island. 

55. Irving T. Latham " 

58. Edward Evanson " 

59. Joseph Tomelsk Newport. 

60. Willard F. Mitchell Block Island. 

61. David A. Mitchell " 

62. Irving A. Ball 

63. Thaddeus A. Ball 

64. Chester A. Littlefield 

65. Walter A. Littlefield 

67. Stanton C. Allen 

68. Emory A. Dickens " 

69. Joshua Smith 

71. Abel Edward Allen .- 

72. Eleazer Allen 

73. Parker Mitchell 

74. Ezra B. Dunn 

75. Barzilla B. Dunn 

76. John F. Hayes 

77. Emanuel Allen " 

79. Roswell Mitchell 

81. Howard Wiley Newport. 

82. Lyman Hall Westerly. 

83. H. Atmore Smith Wakefield. 



20 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

License 
No. Name. Location. 

84. Richard Steadman Block Island. 

85. Silas Hall 

86. Charles Hall 

87. John Sarris Newport. 

88. Dimitros Damascus " 

89. George Stamatos " 

90. Oscar S. Dykstra Wakefield. 

91. Oscar S. Dykstra 

92. Bernal H. Dodge Block Island. 

95. John A. Papa Newport. 

94. George F. Tew 

95. Walter D. Tew 

96. Eugene Tew " 

97. Edward Roy 

98. Bub Pettin 

99. Peter Andrews "■ 

100. Peter Palmer 

101. Perikles Booras " 

102. John Conisotas " 

103. Raktakis Raftakis 

104. Restcome E. Peabody Middletown. 

105. Beck Anderson Newport. 

107. Nicholas Alexandre " 

108. Anthony Matthianos " 

109. Harry Violet 

110. John B. King Jamestown. 

111. John B. Sherman Peacedale. 

112. Jerome T. Blount Newport. 

113. James P. Hennessey Peacedale. 

114. John Johnson Newport. 

115. Augustus Caswell " 

116. R. G. Burdick Narragansett Pier. 

117. John S. Wilcox Little Compton 

119. Nicholas Trocotas Newport. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



21 



License 
No. Name. Location. 

120. George Lathrop Prudence Island. 

121. H. F. Eaton Saunderstown. 

122. R. R. Matterson 

123. Wm. A. Matterson " 

124. Archie C. Matterson " 

125. Lewis Miller* 

127. Thomas Nickerson Sakomiet Point. 

128. Frank W. Parmele Castle Hill. 

129. Guy Avalone Newport, 

130. Edgar F. Grinnel 

131. Jack M. Noranka Portsmouth. 

132. Amasa Johnson Jamestown. 

133. Charles Lee Pendleton Bristol. 

134. Nicholas Julias Newport. 

135. Lazarus Brown 

136. Nicholas Mataronas 

137. Domotaris Domotaris 

138. Vasilas Hanos 

139. E. B. Durfee 

140. John Gionis 

141. John Violet 

142. Thomas James 

143. Emanuel Allen Block Island. 

144. Mark Violet Newport. 

145. Steloi J. Palmer 

146. Richard Currie Charlestown. 

148. Ernest D. Andreas Newport. 

150. Edward N. Lawton 

151. Nicholas K. Card 

152. Jacob Anderegg 

153. Demetre John 

154. Vasilas Paris 

156. Constantine Conomus 



♦License Revoked. 



22 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

License 
No. Name. Location 

157. John McDonald Middletown. 

158. Prescott Moldin 

159. Angelo J. Palmer. Newport. 

160. George Woviotis ■ " 

161. Angelo Maniotis " 

162. William Holt 

163. Herbert J. Peckham Middletown. 

164. Nicholas Salonikas Newport. 

165. Stamos Salonikas 

166. John D. Doyle ' 

167. Joseph S. Nones 

168. Constantine Hanos 

169. Alexandro J. Fludder 

170. Walter Chace 

171. Nicholas Martin 

172. William H. James 

178. Jesse E. Crowell Bristol. 

179. Manuel Krostidalo " 

180. Floyd Huftalen Warren. 

181. Marcus Huftalen 

182. Fotis Tregonis Newport. 

183. William C. Allen Narragansett Pier. 

184. Isaac A. Allen " 

186. G. A. G. Brown Jamestown. 

187. Oder S. Dunn Block Island. 

188. R. A. Sanchazee 

190. 0. Arthur Kitchen Newport. 

192. John Grimes Block Island. 

193. Irving T. Wilcox Tiverton. 

196. Everett A. Willis Block Island. 

198. Jewett R. Saunders Jamestown. 

201. Langworthy H. Pearce, Jr Narragansett Pier. 

203. Joseph Silvia Tiverton. 

204. H. Hillyer Burdick . Narragansett Pier. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 23 

License 
No. Name. Location. 

205. Walter H. Munro Warren. 

206. Edward A. Fitzgerald 

207. George O. Fitzgerald " 

208. Samuel T. Oatley Narragansett Pier. 

210. Fred B.Tucker 

211. Edward T. Taylor, Jr Narragansett Pier. 

213. Harry E. Harvey 

214. Manuel Silviera Little Compton. 

215. Frank Brown 

217. Judson A. Manchester Newport. 

218. Earnest E. Streeter Wakefield. 

220. Henry Milton Bundy Little Compton. 

223. Myron G. Tucker Wakefield. 

225. William M. Wyatt Portsmouth. 

227. Charles Gross Newport. 

228. John Taylor Jamestown. 

230. Wilham Allen Newport. 

231. Antonio R. Medeiros Middletown. 

232. Ray S. Mott Newport. 

233. Henry A. Burgess " 

234. William L. Weaver 

235. Procopios Mataronas " 

236. George Mataronas " 

239. Robert P. Hall Westerly. 

240. George M.Nye 

241. Elvin M.Scott 

242. George H. Brayman " 

245. H. E. Sisson 

246. Asahel B. Larkin 

247. JohnF. Maxson 

248. F. O. Lamphear 

249. Thomas T. Saunders 

250. Edward Andrews Wickford. 

251. Edward Andrews, Jr " 



24 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

License 
No. Name. Location. 

253. Comlis Demetreos Comlis Ne\vport. 

254. John Espanolia " 

256. Norman McFadden Little Compton. 

258. Joseph A. Maytum Bristol. 

259. Isaac Meiggs Block Island. 

260. E.M. Slate 

261. Fred A. Slate. .. 

262. Harry S. Champlin Narragansett Pier. 

263. Reuben McKinney " 

264. Thomas W. Rhodes 

265. Joshua G. Champlm 

266. Henry C. Whaley 

267. Alvin 0. Gould ' 

269. Elisha Hewett Champlin Wakefield. 

270. Horace Tucker 

271. Charles S. Clarke Jamestown. 

273. Henry C. Johnson, 2d Hamilton. 

274. Arthur C. Wilbur Little Compton. 

275. Joseph Marshall* Jamestown. 

275. Walter Jackson Providence. 

276. Frank W. Johnson Hamilton. 

277. John S. Petritis Jamestown, 

278. Constantine Frank Narragansett Pier. 

279. Peter Goudy Newport. 

280. Alfred A. Peckham Tiverton. 

281. George A. Martin Newport. 

282. John Mustacas 

283. JuUas J. Forgeeti 

284. Ellis B. Wilbur Little Compton. 

285. William F. Freeborn Portsmouth. 

286. L. Wardsworth Wickford. 

287. Charles W. Cowles NeA\i3ort. 

288. Michael Frank Narragansett Pier. 

♦License Revoked. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 25 

License 
No. Name. Location. 

290. Joseph C. Silvia Little Compton. 

291. Willard F. Borden Tiverton. 

292. Clarence H. King Jamestown. 

293. John A. James Newport. 

294. Herbert L. Smith Wakefield. 

295. Nicholas Batlis Newport. 

296. Marvin Thompson Portsmouth. 

297. Marcus M. Wilcox Tiverton. 

298. Ferdinand D. Conning Bristol. 

299. Albert H. Porter Dutch Island. 

300. George C. Harris Jamestown. 

302. John C. Molden .Middletown. 

303. John F. Connell Newport. 

304. Benjamin Johanson " 

306. Rudolph Schade Jamestown. 

308. Edward F. Sweet Narragansett Pier. 

309. Bernard Murphy Newport. 

312. P. 0. Mott, Jr Block Island. 

313. William P. Briggs Narragansett Pier. 

314. John A. Hart Newport. 

316. Joshua F. Clark Narragansett Pier, 

317. Harry D. Clarke 

318. George Marshall Bristol. 

321. Nicholas Petritis Jamestown. 

322. William E. Smith Oakland Beach. 

324. Herbert Wilcox Charlestown. 

325. Howard P. Wilcox 

330. Thomas Perry George Jamestown. 

331. John Townsend Oakland Beach. 

332. Anthony Axiotes Newport. 

334. Cleveland H. Clarke Westerly. 

335. John M. Silvia Newport. 

336. Joseph WiUiamson " 

337. Joseph E. Champlin Charlestown. 

4 



26 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

License 
No. Name. Location. 

340. Ebenezer Crowell Conimicut. 

342. James Driscoll Newport. 

344. Patrick H. Dillon Wakefield. 

346. William Littlefield Block Island. 

348. L. C. Luth Newport. 

349. Charles E. Larkin Westerly. 

353. Albert Sherman Portsmouth. 

354. Jean Carroll Sakonnet Point. 

356. Gordon Bliven Newport. 

357. Walter S. H. Bliven 

358. Maurice Fleetwood " 

359. George L. Payne Block Island. 

360. Edwin W. Nash Watch Hill. 

361. Thomas Bliven Newport. 

362. Elisha M. Taylor Wakefield. 

364. Manuel Ramos Newport. 

365. Arnold James " 

366. Annie D. Parke Little Compton. 

367. James A. Wright Wakefield. 

369. Daniel McKeown Newport. 

370. James Skapinakis Newport. 

371. Thomas Kristodolo 

372. Charles B. Albro Prudence Island. 

373. William S. Albro 

374. Manuel S. Nones Newport. 

375. Anastaso Salonikas '' 

376. Charles A. James " 

377. Stephen Mitchell 

378. Edward L. Harvey " 

379. C. Johnson " 

380. John Reardon 

381. William H. Dickerson Warren. 

382. John C. Dickerson " 

383. William C. Tucker Wakefield. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 27 

License 
No. Name. Location. 

384. George H. Sweet Narragansett Pier. 

385. Howard D. Browning Wakefield. 

386. Leon M. Champlin Narragansett Pier. 

387. Herbert A. Nicholas Warren. 

388. Christian T. Luth Newport. 

389. James Collins 

390. Martin Hord 

391. Alfred J. Grows 

392. Anton Popper 

393. Clarence McClure 

394. Wilham Alvin Bliven 

395. Percy R. Deals Bristol. 

396. E. Wilfred Matterson Saunderstown. 

397. Frank A. Domingo* Newport. 

398. G. B. Mitchell Jamestown. 

399. J. C. W. Porter Narragansett Pier. 

400. Frank E. Trask Warren. 

♦License Revoked. 

BEAM TRAWLING. 

Beam trawling was not carried on very extensively in Narragansett 
Bay in 1911. Fish were not so plentiful and about the only ground 
dragged over to any extent by the beam trawls was that portion of 
the East Passage, near Gould Island. It would seem as though beam 
trawling was gradually regulating itself as far as the bay is concerned. 
Some of this falling off is due to the extension of the oyster industry. 
In other localities the scarcity of the fish and the engagement of the 
fishermen in more profitable branches of the fishing industry have 
very much diminished the amount of trawling. The auto trawling 
outside of the bay was not particularly remunerative except in certain 
limited areas. 

SALT WATER LINE-FISHING. 

Line-fishing within Narragansett Bay was very successful this 
past year. The tautog, or black fish, around Newport, while not 



28 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

especially abundant, a number of good catches were reported. In the 
upper part of the bay the general fishing was excellent. Many quite 
large squiteague were caught. The hickory shad were not quite so 
abundant as they were last year. The hand line-fishing for scup was 
as usual very poor, as very few of these fish reached the upper part 
of the bay. 

FISH-TRAPS, SET IN RHODE ISLAND WATERS, AND LIST OF TRAP 

OWNERS. 

A table giving the number and distribution of the fish-traps in 
Rhode Island waters for the past fourteen years is given below. 

The steady increase in the total number of traps which it will be 
observed, continued up to and including 1910, was lacking this past 
year, and a slight decrease (6 traps) took place. Most of this decrease 
was in the Off Shore Division, where the fishermen abandoned certain 
sets. As will be seen on the accompanying chart (Chart III), the 
string of scup traps off Sakonnet have been extended a little 
farther off shore. The outmost trap was approximately ten miles 
southeast of Seal Rock, and about six miles south of Sakonnet Light. 

In the accompanying table the following arbitrary divisions have 
been made for the sake of convenience: 

I. Providence River. — South to a line joining Warwick Point and 
Popasquash Point. 

II. Greenwich Bay. — The West Passage south of Providence 
River division and north of a line drawn east and west, touching the 
southern part of Hope Island. 

III. West Passage. — The West Passage south of the Greenwich 
Bay division, north of a line drawn due west from Beaver Tail and 
west of a line connecting the south point of Prudence Island and 
North Point, Conanicut Island. 

IV. Mount Hope Bay. — North of Railroad Bridge, Tiverton, and 
a line connecting Bristol Ferry and Mussel Shoal Light. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



29 



V. East Passage. — South of Providence and Mount Hope Bay 
divisions and north of a line from Beaver Tail to Brenton's Point. 

VI. Sakonnet River. — The Sakonnet River south of Railroad 
Bridge to a line connecting Flint Point and the Breakwater, Sakonnet 
Point. 

VII. Off Shore. — Traps south of above divisions and east of 
Point Judith, not including those off Block Island. 

VIII. Block Island. — Traps set off this island. 

IX. Watch Hill. — Traps set along the mainland of Rhode Island, 
west of Point Judith. 

Table VI. 
Table Showing Number and General Distribution of Fish-Traps Since 1898. 



Year. 


g 

d 

(O 

2 


m 

a 
O 


6 
1 

1 


pq 

§• 

W 
d 

i 


be 
1 


U 

S 

a 
§ 

si 
VI 


s 

to 
o 


13 

o 

s 




"3 
o 


1898 


4 
3 
4 
7 
6 
7 
6 
6 
6 
7 
7 
7 
9 
10 


6 
10 
16 
15 
22 
21 
27 
26 
35 
37 
38 
31 
29 
30 


26 
23 
24 
24 
27 
32 
33 
33 
27 
30 
32 
32 
26 
20 


9 
11 
16 
13 
13 
13 

7 
11 
11 
12 
12 
12 
14 
13 


34 
35 
34 
52 
52 
72 
78 
82 
80 
87 
87 
88 
92 
93 


15 
15 
12 
14 
14 
16 
14 
20 
20 
22 
22 
26 
20 
21 


25 
24 
29 
26 
27 
30 
40 
56 
64 
70 
73 
73 
71 
66 






119 


1899 






121 


1900 






135 


1901 






151 


1902 






161 


1903 






195 


1904 






220 


1905 


6 
6 
6 




240 


1906 


249 


1907 


271 


1908 


271 


1909 


8 

8 

10 


14 
14 


277 


1910 


283 


1911 


977 







30 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

1911. 
LIST OF TRAPS AND OWNERS. 

Block Island Traps. (See Chart I.) 

Ball & Co. (3 traps) South of New Harbor. 

Ball & Co Southwest Point. 

Dunn, G. P., Jr. (2 traps) South of New Harbor. 

Dunn, G. P., Jr Southwest Point. 

Lewis, R. G Southwest Point. 

Littlefield. H. K Southwest Point. 

Sheffield, A. N South Sandy Point. 

Watch Hill Traps. (See Chart II.) 

Alliston, G. E Noyes Point. 

Babcock Brothers Watch Hill Point. 

Babcock Brothers Noyes Point. 

Burdick Brothers (4 traps) Little Narragansett Bay. 

Clarke, F. E Squid's Ledge. 

Hillyer, Burdick Breakwater, Point Judith. 

Larkin Brothers (2 traps) Squid's Ledge. 

Scott, E. M Watch Hill Reef. 

Wilcox, E. F (2 traps) Green Hill Point. 

Off-Shore Traps. (See Chart III.) 

Anderson, C. B Coggeshall's Ledge. 

Anderson, C. B. (000)* South Sakonnet Light. 

Atlantic Trapping Company (00) South Sakonnet Light. 

Atlantic Trapping Company South Narragansett Pier. 

Atlantic Trapping Company (00) South Seal Rock. 

Brightman Fish Co. (00) Seal Ledge. 

Brightman Fish Company South Sakonnet Light. 

Brightman Fish Company South Cormorant Rock. 

Brownell Brothers South Narragansett Pier. 

♦The ciphers indicate the number of traps on one string of leaders. 



smi POINT 



Mag • 



SheffieUi • 




f<!>J 



VS110 



>.E. POINT 

JJtUefield 






BLOCK ISLAND. 

Showing the location of Fish Traps for 1911. 

CHART I. 




g 


03 




o 


^ 
H 




2 








^ 




> 


OQ 


_ 


S 


S 




mJ 


"o 


H 


») 




tf 




c 


■«J 


X 
X 


o 


n 


o 


o 




H 


■"^ 




S 


bO 

a 

'% 
o 





« ^ 



• M ? 




COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 31 

Erownell Bros. (00) Southeast Seal Rock. 

Carpenter, G Narragansett Pier. 

Cottrell, George (00) South Seal Rock. 

Easterbrook, C. (00) Price's Neck. 

Fish-Mott Co Southeast Seal Rock. 

Fish-Mott Co South Sakonnet Light. 

Gray, Ben East Sachuest Point. 

Gray, Ben West Sakonnet Light. 

Grinnel, F West Cormorant Rock. 

Grinnel, F South Cormorant Rock. 

Grinnel, F Sakonnet Light. 

Macomber & Nickerson South of Pier. 

Macomber & Nickerson (00) Southeast Seal Rock. 

Macomber & Nickerson South Seal Rock. 

Macomber & Nickerson (00000000) South Sakonnet Light. 

McFaden & Bowman Breakwater, Sakonnet. 

Newport Cold Storage Co. (00) Southeast Seal Rock. 

Newport Cold Storage Co Southeast Seal Rock. 

Newport Cold Storage Co South Sakonnet Light. 

Newport Cold Storage Co. (00) West Cormorant Rock. 

Newport Cold Storage Co South Cormorant Rock. 

Ramus, Manuel Third Beach, Newport. 

Rose, George South Sakonnet Light. 

Rose, George South Cormorant Rock. 

Sakonnet River Oyster Co. (00) Seal Rock. 

Sakonnet River Oyster Co Seal Ledge. 

Sakonnet River Oyster Co Southeast Seal Rock. 

Sherman, A Easton's Point. 

Susa, J. (00) Easton's Point. 

Susa, J Easton's Point. 

Tew Bros West Price's Neck. 

Tew Bros. (00) West Sachuest Point. 

Wilcox, Henry South Cormorant Rock. 

Wilcox, Henry South Cormorant Rock. 



32 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

Wilcox, Holder (00) South Cormorant Rock. 

Wilcox, Holder South Sakonnet Light. 

Other Traps. {See Chart III.) 

Aldrich & Co. (00) Below North Point Conanicut. 

Almy, Frank High Hill Point. 

Almy, Frank South High Hill Point. 

Almy, Frank (00) South High Hill Point. 

Anderson, C. B Castle Hill. 

Anderson, C. B. (00) Coddington Cove. 

Anderson, C. B North Coddington Cove. 

Baker, N Plum Beach. 

Baker, N Casey's Point. 

Blanchard, Charles (00) Bear's Point. 

Brightman, C Warwick Neck. 

Brightman, G South Prudence Park. 

Brightman, G High Hill Bend. 

Brown (00) North Rumstick Point. 

Carpenter, G South Ferry. 

Carpenter, G Austin's Hollow. 

Cook, H Upper East Shore, Sakonnet. 

Corey, Ed. (000) Lower West Shore, Sakonnet. 

Corey, George (00) South High Hill Point. 

Corey, George Brown's Point. 

Corey & Martin Brown's Point. 

Corey & Martin (00) South High Hill Point. 

Corey & Martin (000) South Brown's Point. 

Corey & Martin (0000) North Church's Point. 

Cottrell, S West Popasquash Neck. 

Cottrell, S West Popasquash Neck. 

Cottrell, S (00) Upper East Sakonnet River. 

Cottrell, W. (00) North Tiverton. 

Cottrell, W. (00) North Tiverton. 

Doane, (3 traps) North Popasquash Neck. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 33 

Doane Rumstick. 

Doane West Shore Bristol Neck 

Falkner, G South Portsmouth. 

Fish, Clinton (00) North Tiverton. 

Fish, Horace North Sapowet Point. 

Gray Brothers (00) West Hope Island. 

Gray Brothers (00) South Prudence Park. 

Gray Brothers (0000) Prudence Park. 

Gray, E. (00) South Sandy Point, Sakonnet. 

Graj', E South Sandy Point, Sakonnet. 

Gray, E. (00) South McCurry's Point. 

Gray, E McCurry's Point. 

Grinnell, E West Shore, Patience Island. 

Grinnell, E Mackerel Cove. 

Hicks, O. G South Castle Hill. 

Billiard, J Buttonwoods. 

Howland, J Island Park. 

James, Arnold Taylor's Point. 

James, A'-nold Jamestown. 

King & Wait (0000) South McCurry's Point. 

King & Wait South Sapowet Point. 

Lake, I Sauga Point. 

Lawton, F. (00) Mackerel Cove. 

Lawton, F Mackerel Cove. 

Lawton, F Castle Hill. 

Lawton, F Mackerel Cove. 

Lawton, F. (00) Brenton's Cove. 

Lewis Brothers Packard's Rock. 

Lewis Brothers Wild Goose Point. 

Lewis Brothers Dutch Island Harbor. 

Lewis Brothers North Dutch Island Harbor. 

Lewis Brothers Greene's Point. 

Lewis Brothers Sandy Point, Conanicut Island. 

Lewis Brothers North Point, Conanicut Island. 

5 



34 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

Lewis, Wilson (000) South Sandy Point, Sakonnet. 

Lewis, Wilson (00) North Sandy Point, Sakonnet. 

Locke, Moses Cedar Tree Point. 

Locke, Moses North Chepiwanoxet. 

Macomber, F. A North High Hill Point. 

Macomber, F. A Warwick Neck. 

Macomber, F. A Bear Points 

Macomber, F. A South Wood's Castle. 

Manchester Brothers (00) High Hill Point. 

Manchester, D Quonset Point. 

Martin, C South High Hill Point. 

Matchett, H ' Southwest Hope Island. 

Mitchell, E Buttonwoods. 

Mitchell, E Sally Rocks. 

Negus Brothers Mount Hope Point. 

Negus Brothers South Mount Hope Point. 

Northup & Co Austin's Hollow. 

Northup, A Buttonwoods. 

Ramus, Manuel (000) Wood's Castle. 

Ramus, Manuel Sachuest Point. 

Rice, H. H Warwick Neck. 

Rose, Arthur (00) Hog Island. 

Rose, George Church's Cove. 

Rose, George North Mount Hope Point. 

Rose, Ed South Stone Bridge. 

Rose, Ed (00) Island Park. 

Rose Sam (00) North Sapowet Point. 

Rose, Sam Upper East Shore, Sakonnet. 

Rose & Davenport (00) Portsmouth. 

Rose & Davenport North Sapowet Point. 

Sanford, J. . South High Hill Point. 

Seabury, Benj. (00) Black Point. 

Seabury, Benj South Sandy Point, Sakonnet. 

Seabury, Benj North Sandy Point, Sakonnet.. 



CLMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 35 

Shephard, J Popasquash Point. 

Shepard, J Warren. 

Sherman, Albert North Black Point. 

Silvia, P. (00) Flint Point. 

Smith Brothers East Shore, Conanicut Island. 

Smith Brothers Southeast Prudence Island. 

Smith, J. W. (00) Quonset Point. 

Snell & Pierce (00) Fogland Point. 

Snell & Pierce (00) Black Point. 

Snell & Pierce (00) South McCurry's Point. 

Spencer H South Greenwich Bay. 

Stafford, J North Railroad Bridge, Tiverton. 

Taber & Son North Tiverton. 

Tourgee, P South Fox Hill Point. 

Wait, J. L (00) North Sapowet Point. 

Wait, J. L North Fogland Point. 

Wait, Norman (00) North Fogland Point. 

Wait & Wait (00) North Fogland Point. 

Wait & Wait (00) South Sandy Point. 

Wait, H McCurry's Point. 

Wilkie High Hill Point. 

Wilkie High Hill Point. 

Wilcox, Charles Mouth Sakonnet River. 

Wilcox, M. M South Fogland Point. 

Wilcox, M. M North Fogland Point. 

Wilcox, H. (5 traps) Old Buttonwoods. 

Wilcox, John Church's Cove, Sakonnet. 

Willis, G Southeast Prudence Island. 

Wilson, A South Greenwich Bay. 

DEEP WATER FISHING OFF NEWPORT, 1911. 

The fishing season off Newport was slightly below the average. 
The ''runs" of fish were not large and were generally later than 
usual. "Trash" fish, upon which the lobstermen depend for their 



36 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

bait, were scarce, and as late as April 24, halibut heads were shipped 
in for lobster bait. The big scup traps were set about April 28 and 
many were taken up near June 14. Many large blue fish were caught 
this season and sword fish were quite plentiful. 

Scup. — The first reported catch of scup on the Atlantic Coast in 
1911, consisted of about half a dozen taken off the coast of New Jersey, 
April 20. About a week later (April 26) two were caught in the 
traps off Point Judith. April 28th, four were taken at Sakonnet 
Point. A few were caught from this time on, but it was not until 
May 7 that any single catch equalled a barrel. The fish making up 
these early catches were mixed in size and averaged somewhat 
smaller than is usually the case. The run of large fish commenced 
near May 12 and ended June 20. The period of greatest abundance 
was between May 14th and June 1st. A calendar of the run of scup 
since 1905 is given at the end of this section. Table VII. 

Mackerel. — The mackerel arrived on the Atlantic Coast later this 
year than usual. They were first located on April 12 off Chinco- 
teague, Va., on which date about fifty were caught. As the catches 
continued light, only a few to a boat, the mackerel fleet at Newport 
did not set out for the Virginia grounds until April 22d. The first 
shipment of mackerel was received at New York on May 1st and con- 
sisted of 450 shipped from Lewis, Delaware. This is said to be the 
latest date that first shipment of mackerel was ever landed in New 
York. The first catch of mackerel in the traps off Newport was 
about May 6. The record shipment from Newport in 1911 was on 
May 27th and consisted of 25,000 fish. These fish were caught 
near No Mans Land, and were very large, averaging about fifty 
to a barrel. The mackerel season off these waters was generally 
considered poor and waned about August 1st. 

The ^'tinker'' mackerel made their appearance about July 15. 

The first butterfish of the season was caught off Easton's Beach on 
May 2d. Good catches were not made, however, until May 7th. 

The first squiteague, or weak fish, taken in the offshore traps this 
season was caught off Second Beach, Newport, on May 15th. On 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



37 



June loth, in the traps off Narragansett Pier, the first barrel of these 
fish was caught. The 21st of June was the commencement of the 
so-called run. 

Two striped bass, the first of the season, were caught on April 24, 
near Price's Neck. On May 24, a 39-pound specimen was taken. 

Sword Fish were unusually plentiful off shore and many large 
ones were taken. July 18 a sword fish was caught that weighed 468 
pounds when dressed for shipment. 

On July 15th the first horsemackerel was taken from the traps. 

Table VII. 
Calendar of Scup Season off Newport, 1905-1911. 





1905. 


1906. 


1907. 


1908. 


1909. 


1910. 


1911. 


First appearance .... 

Run commences 

Run ends 


May 1. 

May 16. 

June 25 

June 1 to 
June 18. 


April 20. 

May 1. 

June 15. 

May 5 to 
June 4. 


May 2. 

May 10. 

June 24. 

May 21 to 
June 10. 


April 23. 

April 29. 

June 9. 

April 29 to 
June 1. 


AprU 19. 

May 1. 

June 14. 

May 10 to 
June 7. 


April 24. 

May 8. 

June 22. 

May 13 to 
June 5. 


AprU 26. 
May 12. 
June 20. 


Most abundant 


May 14 to 
June 1. 



Table VIII. 

Calendar of Mackerel Season off Newport, 1905-1911. 



1905. 



1906. 



1907. 



1909. 



1910. 



1911. 



First caught in traps. 

First large shipment 
from Newport 



Most abundant . 



April 28. 



May 14. 

June 1 to 
June 19. 



Record day. 



Season ends at New- 
port 



June 28. 



May 4. 



May 14. 

June 4 to 
June 30. 

June 4. 



Near end 
of July. 



May 2. 



May 17. 



June 11 to 
July 5. 



July 1. 



Near end 
of July. 



April 27. 



May 14. 



May 25 to 
July 1. 



June 20. 



Near end 
of July. 



April 17. 



May 4. 

May 16 to- 
July 1. 

May 24. 



Near mid 
of July. 



April 23. 



May 16. 

May 16 to 
July 25. 

June 10. 



Near end 
of July. 



May 6. 



May 27. 

May 27 to 
June 21. 

May 27. 



Near 
Aug. I. 



38 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



Table IX. 
Appearance of Tinker Mackerel, 1905-1911. 





Year. 


First 
Appearance. 


1905 




1906 




1907 


June 10. 


1908 


May 27. 


1909 


June 17. 


1910 


July 1. 


1911 


July 15. 









Table X. 
Catch of Squiteague in Scup Traps off Newport, 1905-1911. 



"Stragglers" first ap- 
pearance 



Commencement of 



1905. 



1906. 



June 14. 
June 21. 



May 4. 
June 10. 



1907. 



1908. 



May 21. 
June 20. 



May 7. 
June 6. 



1909. 



May 19. 
June 17. 



1910. 



1911. 



April 9. 
June 20. 



May 15. 
June 15. 



Table XI. 
First Appearance of Various Marketable Fish in Traps off Newport, 1905-1911. 



1906. 



1907. 



190S. 



1909. 


1910. 


April 21. 


April 22. 


June 17. 


July 16. 


May 4. 


May 4. 


April 17. 


April 23 


May 4. 


May 1. 


May 1. 


April 21. 


April 19. 


April 24. 


May 1. 


April 20. 


May 19. 


April 9. 


April 21. 


April 20. 



1911. 



Butterfish 

Horsemackerel . 

King Fish 

Mackerel 

Sea bass 

Sea Robins . . . . 

Scup. 

Squid 

Squiteague . . . . 
Striped Bass. . 



May 22. 



April 16. 



May 10. 



April 28. 



May 4. 



May 1. 



June 14. 



April 30. 
April 20. 

May 4. 

May 4. 
April 31. 



May 2. 

May 8. 

May 9. 

May 2. 
May 10. 
May 21. 
May 16. 



April 28. 
June 25. 

May 8. 
April 27. 

May 5. 
April 27. 
April 23. 
April 27. 

May 7. 
April 24. 



May 2. 
July 15. 
May 13. 

May 6. 

May 4. 
April 27. 
April 26. 
April 28. 
May 13. 
April 22. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



39 



The following specimens were added in 1911 to the magnificent 
collection of Commissioner D. B. Fearing: 

Horse mackerel or tunny (Thunnus thynnus), caught near Block Island. 

Flying gurnard {Cephalacanthus volitans), caught near Wickford. 

Spot (Leiostomus xanthurus). 

Wolf -fish (Anarhichas lupus). 

Sheepshead (Archosargus prohatocephalus) , caught off Warwick, R. I., 

weight, 1514 pounds. 
A lobster naturally colored red. 
A lobster naturally colored yellow. 

NoTE.^ — This collection, which is elegantly mounted and adorns 
the walls of his famous library of books and manuscripts on sub- 
jects relating to fishing, is unique in the fact that an attempt has 
been made to get large specimens of the small fish and small specimens 
of the large fish. The species represented were all caught in Rhode 
Island waters. The fist complete to January 1, 1912, is as follows: 

*An alphabetical fist of the mounted specimens of fish caught in 
Rhode Island waters, now in the library of Hon. D. B. Fearing, A. M. 



Alewit'e, 

Amber Jack, 

Angler Fish, 

Black Bass, 

Bluefish, 

Butterfisb, 

Catfish, 

Chicken Halibut, 

Chogset (2 lb. 6 oz.), 

Chub Mackerel, 

Cod, 

Conger Eel, 

Crab Eater, 

Dogfish, 

Eel, 

Flounder, 

Flying Gurnard, 

Haddock, 

Hake, 

Hardtail, 

Herring; 

Kingfish (Menticirrus), 



Ling, 

Lobster (natural red), 

Lobster (natural yellow), 

Mackerel, 

Menhaden, 

Ocean Bonito, 

Orange Filefish, 

Pipe-fish, 

Pollock, 

Rabbit Fish, 

Remora, 

Sail fish (8 ft.), 

Salmon, 

Scabbard-fish, 

Sculpin, 

Scup (6 lbs). 

Sea Bass, 

Sea Robin, ' 

Shad, 

Sheepshead, 

Smelt, 

Skate, 



Spanish-mackerel, 

Spot, 

Spotted Cero, 

Striped Bass, 

Sturgeon, 

Swordfish, 

Tarpon, 

Tautog, 

Tilefish, 

Tomcod, 

Trigger-fish, 

Trout (female), 

Trout (male). 

Tunny, 

Toadfish, 

Violet Ray, 

Weakfish, 

White Perch, 

Window-pane Flounder, 

Winter Flounder, 

Wolf-fish, 

Yellow Perch. 



*Any person who may catch, in Rhode Island waters, any species of fish not included in this 
list is respectfully requested to notify Hon. D. B. Fearing, A. M., Newport, R. I. 



40 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

CHAPTER III. 

ENFORCEMENT OF STATE LAWS. 

While the lack of appropriation prevented as aggressive an en- 
forcement of our fisheries laws as your Commission desired, still the 
chaotic state of affairs which might have resulted had there been no 
enforcement of the State laws, was prevented, and in so far as was 
possible, the laws were strictly enforced. 

The following prosecutions were made and fines imposed and paid 
under the lobster law (the names of those fined are omitted) : 

Newport, April 17, fishing without license $20 00 

Narragansett Pier, May 17, fishing without license 20 00 

Newport, May 6, short lobsters 30 00 

Jamestown, June 16, 18 short lobsters 90 00 

Fox Island, July 6, 10 short lobsters 50 00 

Saunderstown, August 5, 9 short lobsters and 1 egg lobster . 50 00 

Newport, August 16, 5 short lobsters 25 00 



5 00 

Your Commission is very much pleased with the recent decision 
of the supreme court of Rhode Island in upholding the constitu- 
tionality of the lobster license law. It is almost needless to point 
out the very great assistance which the license system renders in the 
enforcement of the lobster laws. It is sincerely hoped that this 
decision will effectually silence that faction of our fishermen — for- 
tunately very small — which desire no fisheries laws, but are willing 
that our splendid fisheries shall be wantonly wasted by short-sighted 
and greedy methods of fishing. 

For the benefit of those who do not wish to read the entire text of 
the decision, we give the following brief summary. The full text 
of the decision is given in Appendix A to the report. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 41 

SUMMARY OF SUPREME COURT DECISION ON LOBSTER LICENSE LAW. 

It was contended that Sections 1 and 2 of Chapter 437 of the 
Pubhc Laws of 1909 were unconstitutional, because: 

I. They denied hcenses to ah ens and citizens of the State of less 
than one years' residence; and, furthermore, ga^ve to the Commis- 
sioners of Inland Fisheries the arbitrary right to refuse licenses to 
citizens of the State. By so doing they impaired the right of the 
people of the State to "enjoy and freely exercise (all) the rights of 
fishery ... to which they have been hithereto entitled under the 
charter and usages of the state" as provided in Section 17, Article 
I, Constitution of Rhode Island; deprived them of "liberty and 
property" in some other manner than by "judgment of (their) peers 
or the law of the land" as provided in Section 10, Article I, Constitu- 
tion of Rhode Island; and was also in conflict with Section 1, Article 
14 of Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, because 
citizens of the United States were deprived of rights "without due 
process of law." 

II. That the above sections of Chapter 437 were further uncon- 
stitutional in the fact that they interfered with the rights of citizens 
to employ any assistants they saw fit in the lobster fishery, and also 
abridged the privileges of citizens of other states and of the United 
States by preventing them from doing manual labor as servants in 
connection with the lobster fisheries. In these particulars the sec- 
tions referred to were in conflict with Section 2, Article 4, Constitu- 
tion of the United States and Section 1, Article 14 of Amendments 
to the Constitution of the United States. 

The decision of the supreme court may be briefly summed up in the 
words of the court, speaking through Chief Justice Dubois. After 
full consideration of the constitutional questions and numerous 
citations of authority, he says: 

"We are therefore of the opinion that the constitutional questions 
aforesaid must be severally answered in the negative. We do not 
find that any of the requirements of the Constitution of the United 



42 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES 

States or of the Constitution of this State, referred to in the questions 
certified to us, have been violated by the provisions of Pub. Laws, 
cap. 437, sees. 1 and 2 (passed May 7, 1909) ... We are of the 
opinion that the enactment of the statue in question was a proper 
exercise of the police powers by the legislature of the State, in a 
matter concerning only the people of the State, and that it was 
entirely unnecessary for the legislature to consider what effect the 
statute under consideration would have upon aliens, or even upon the 
citizens of other states, because it merely involved the conservation 
of one species of shellfish in the public waters of the State, a purely 
local natural resource, and that the legislature has full discretion to 
prescribe the modes and methods to be followed in the accomplish- 
ment of such conservation." 

He further stated that "We are unable to perceive that the rights of 
any person have been infringed. On the contrary, it seems that the 
greatest good of the greatest number will be advanced by the legislation 
complained of." 

CHANGES MADE IN THE FISHERIES LAWS. 

The following changes were made in our fisheries laws at the 
January session, 1911: 

The "closed season" upon black bass was extended, making it 
illegal to catch or take them between January 1st and July 1st. 

The legal length of black bass was made ten inches, instead of 
eight, as under the old law. 

Licensed lobstermen, who were incapacitated by any reason from 
attending their lobster gear, were permitted to employ another 
person, if a citizen of the United States, to attend their gear; pro- 
vided that the person so employed wore the license badge of his 
employer while attending said gear. 

The Commissioners of Inland Fisheries were empowered to grant 
a permit to licensed lobstermen to set pots on a trawl in those locali- 
ties that are unsuitable for separately bouying the same. 



- 1910 



-mi- 

JAJSI . FEB , MARCH , APRIL , MAY , JUNE 



JULY 



OPT NOV DEC JAJSI FEB , MARCH , APRIL , MAY , dUJNj!. , ^yjL.\ . AUG , SEPT OCT NOV DEC 




Weekly Temperature Averages of the Air and the Sea Water at the Wickford Laboratory from Oct. 26, 1910 to Dec. 23, 1911. 
Light line represents the sea water temperatures. Heavy line — ^ represents the air temperatures. 



42 

St 

ce 

ci 

o] 

e: 

n 

e 

s 

c 

( 



ties that are unsuitable for separately bouymg uie ^aiixo. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 43 



CHAPTER IV. 

THE CONTINUED EXAMINATION OF THE PHYSICAL AND 
BIOLOGICAL CONDITIONS OF NARRAGANSETT BAY. 

While the physical and biological investigations of the bay were 
continued to a certain extent this year, only a small portion of time 
could be expended upon it for reasons given above. 

The physical conditions (temperature, weather, etc.) were more 
favorable to the fishing industries this year than in 1910. A chart 
of the weekly averages of water and air temperatures at the Wick- 
ford Hatchery, between November, 1910, and January 1, 1911, are 
given here, and compare quite favorably with previous years. The 
water temperature was somewhat higher than in 1910, especially for 
the months of November and December. 

The biological conditions worthy of note, were as follows: 

The absence of such great schools of small fish as were seen in other 
years, especially 1910. 

A quite large and general set of oysters. 

The occurrence of an extensive set of soft shell clams on almost all 
shores of the bay. This was unfortunately followed by a tremendous 
mortality, leaving in many localities windrows of the tmy shells on 
the beaches. At the commencement of this year, 1912, it is quite 
uncertain if enough have survived, except in a few localities, to stock 
the shores even fairly well. 

The scallop set near Wickford was greater than for a number of 
years. However, in the fall of the year at every low tide, number of 
gulls could be seen feeding upon them. At the commencement of 
the cold weather and ice a large part of the remaining scallops have 
worked out to deeper water and are consequently safe, but it is certain 
that a large number were destroyed by the gulls. 



44 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



CHAPTER V. 

THE DISSEMINATION OF ACCURATE INFORMATION CON- 
CERNING THE AQUATIC RESOURCES OF THE STATE, 
FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENLISTING THE INTEREST AND 
SYMPATHY OF THE PUBLIC IN THE CONSERVATION 
AND DEVELOPMENT OF THESE RESOURCES. 

The work of your Commission in the reprinting and distribution 
of the various instructive papers which occur in its annual reports 
has continued to be quite popular. Numerous requests have been 
received, both from this country and abroad, for literature in regard 
to the clam, lobster and general fisheries subjects. The supply of 
many of the reprints has become exhausted, but it is hoped later 
on to publish other articles which will not only replace the exhausted 
ones, but will also bring the information up to date. 

The exhibit of Sea Farming, which your Commission has given 
for a number of years at the Fair Grounds of the Washington County 
Agricultural Society, attracted this year as large crowds as any 
other exhibition on the grounds, and your Commission has been 
highly complimented upon it. 

At the Wickford Experiment Station, in addition to the enter- 
tainment of many other visitors, your Commission, through its super- 
intendent, has extended the courtesies of the station to high school 
classes in biology and natural history societies. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 45 



CHAPTER VI. 

THE CO-OPERATION WITH OTHER FISHERIES AUTHORI- 
TIES. 

Your Commission has been in correspondence with every State 
Fish Commission in the country and has also been in communication 
with the fisheries authorities of other countries. The most recent 
letter was a request from the Northumberland Fisheries Committee 
of Great Britain for thirty copies of the pamphlet published last year 
descriptive of our lobster rearing apparatus. 

The annual meeting of the American Fisheries Society which was 
held in St. Louis was attended by three members of your Commis- 
sion. One member of the Commission was re-elected to an important 
office and another was appointed on the executive committee. 

Your Commission wishes to acknowledge among many other 
courtesies the receipts of 20,000 salmon eggs from the United States 
Bureau of Fisheries. 



46 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



CHAPTER VII. 

THE PROPAGATION OF LOBSTERS AT THE WICKFORD 
EXPERIMENT STATION. 

The lobster rearing at Wickford in 1911 was very successful in 
view of the small number of egg lobsters made use of and the limited 
number of assistants employed. The season opened on May 21 and 
closed August 21. During this time the plant was never taxed to its 
full capacity. The number of lobsters reared to the bottom stages 
was 291,042. About 600 egg lobsters were made use of. The yoimg 
lobsters were liberated at the following places: East Shore Con- 
anicut Island, West Shore Conanicut Island, Mill Cove (Wickford), 
Poplar Point, Gould Island, Hope Island, Fox Island, Sakonnet 
River and Block Island. 

Table XII. 
Total Number of Fourth and Fifth Stage Lobsters Reared Each Year Since 1900. 



Year. 


IV. 


V. 


1900 


3,425 

8,974 

27,300 

13,500 

50,597 

103,572 

189,384 

294,896 

322.672 

178,542 

511,274 

*29 1,042 




1901 




1902 




1903 




1904 




1905 




1906 ." 


24,800 


1907 


4,900 


1908 


5,481 


1909 




1910 




28,372 


1911 










Total 


1,995,178 


63,553 







*The entire number of lobsters liberated in 1911 were in the latter part of the fourth stage and 
beyond. 



COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 47 

During the winter and early spring an addition of several cars 
was made to our lobster rearing plant, which now consists of forty- 
cars. It is confidently expected that this addition \vdll enable us to 
very nearly approach the million mark in our lobster rearing output. 

Various experiments were conducted this year in rearing lobsters 
beyond the fifth and sixth stages. Some success was obtained, 
especially in feeding car contrivances. It is hoped to give a fuller 
report on this subject another year. 

The " green " egg lobsters carried throught the" winter came through 
with varying success. In certain specially devised cars as high as 
98 per cent, were brought through in good condition. A feed car 
put in at Block Island in the fall of 1911, while not given a thorough 
test, held a number of ''green" egg lobsters for about one month 
with practically no loss. 



48 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

THE PROPAGATION OF MARINE FISHES. 

In view of our financial straits, the winter flounder was the only 
fish propagated in 1911. A few minor experiments were conducted 
in retaining and feeding certain young fishes, but no noteworthy 
results were obtained. 

THE WINTER FLOUNDER. 

As was anticipated in last year's report, the propagation of this 
species was carried out on a large scale in 1911. While we did not 
accomplish all that was desired, still some headway has been made in 
inexpensive methods of incubating the eggs in large quantities. Over 
one hundred million eggs were hatched, with a result of about eighty 
per cent. Of this eighty million a large number were reared through 
the transition period. It is hoped another year to greatly improve 
and extend this department of work. 

In obtaining the eggs, artificial fertilization has been abandoned 
and the more natural Norwegian method of allowing the fish to spawn 
naturally in cars has been adopted. This latter method gives much 
the best results, sometimes yielding over 98 per cent, of good eggs, 
while 80 per cent, is good average results from artificial fertilization. 



APPENDIX A. 



State vs. Constantine Kofines et al. 

July 7, 1911. 

Present: Dubois, C. J., Blodgett, Johnson, Parkhurst, and Sweet- 
land, J J. 

Criminal Complaint. Heard on constitutional questions certi- 
fied to the Supreme Court. 

Dubois, C. J. The above entitled cases are complaints brought 
before the District Court of the First Judicial District for violations 
of the provisions of Pub. Laws, cap. 437, § 1, passed May 7, 1909, and 
severally charged that the defendant, therein named, at a certain 
time therein specified, and at a certain place within the territorial 
waters of the state therein designated, did catch and take a certain 
lobster, and also that he did place, set, keep, maintain, supervise, 
lift, raise, draw, and cause to be placed, set, kept, maintained, super- 
vised, lifted, raised and drawn, in and from said place in said waters, 
a certain pot and other contrivance designed and adapted for the 
catching and taking of lobsters. 

These cases have been certified from the district court aforesaid 
to this court, in compliance with the provisions of Gen. Laws, 1909, 
cap. 298, § 1, for the hearing and determination of certain questions 
as to the constitutionality of sections 1 and 2 of said cap. 437. Said 
sections read as follows: 

''Section 1. No person, either as principal, agent, or servant, 
shall, at any time, catch or take any lobster from any of the waters 
in the jurisdiction of this state, or place, set, keep, maintain, super- 
vise, lift, raise, or draw in or from any of said waters, or cause to be 
placed, set, kept, maintained, supervised, lifted, raised, or drawn in 



50 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

or from any of said waters, any pot or other contrivance designed or 
adapted for the catching or taking of lobsters, unless licensed so to 
do as hereinafter provided. Every person who shall violate any of 
the provisions of this section shall be fined twenty dollars or be im- 
prisoned not more than thirty days, or both, for each such offence." 

"Sec. 2. The commissioners of inland fisheries may grant or 
refuse to grant licenses to catch and take lobsters from the waters 
within the jurisdiction of this state (in the manner, at the times, and 
subject to the regulations provided in this act) to such citizens of 
this state as have resided in this state for at least one year next pre- 
ceding the granting of such license as they may think proper. When- 
ever any such license shall be granted, the same shall be granted to 
expire on the 15th day of November next succeeding the granting 
of the same, unless sooner revoked as hereinafter provided, and each 
person to whom such license shall be granted shall, for each license, 
pay to said commissioners the sum of five dollars for the use of the 
state. Said commissioners, in their annual report to the general 
assembly, shall state the number of licenses granted, with the names of 
the persons licensed and the amount of money received therefor. 
Said commissioners shall issue to each person licensed as aforesaid a 
certificate stating the name of the person to whom such license has 
been granted and the date of expiration of such license, and shall also 
issue to each person so licensed a metal badge in such form and 
bearing such inscription as said commissioners shall determine. 
If any person licensed as aforesaid shall, at any time, be adjudged 
guilty of any violation of any of the provisions of this act, after full 
hearing by said commissioners or a majority of them, the said com- 
missioners or a majority of them shall revoke the license issued to 
such person, and such person shall thereupon cease to have any 
authority thereunder." 

The constitutional questions are raised upon the record in the 
several cases by defendant's motion to dismiss, by the defendant's 
demurrers to the complaint, and by complainant's demurrers to the 
defendant's pleas. 



APPENDIX. 51 

In the case of Kofines and that of Saderas, the questions are 
brought upon the record by motions to dismiss the complaints, the 
motions being identical. 

In the case of Crestodolas the questions are brought upon the 
record by demurrer to the complaint. 

In the case of Raftak and that of Deamotares, the questions are 
brought upon the record by motions to dismiss filed by the respond- 
ents after the filing, by the complainant, of demurrers to pleas. The 
motions to dismiss are identical. 

The pleas filed in the case of Raftak set forth : 

First. That the respondent, at the time mentioned in the com- 
plaint, was and for a long time (but less than one year) had been a 
citizen of the State of Rhode Island. 

Second. That the respondent, at the time mentioned in the 
complaint, was a citizen of the United States and of the State of 
New York and was, and for a long time had been, a resident of the 
City of Newport, in the State of Rhode Island. 

Third. That the acts with which he stands charged in the com- 
plaint were performed by him in the course of his employment as the 
servant or agent of Angelo Maniotis who, at the time mentioned in 
the complaint, was duly licensed under the provisions of said section 
2 of chapter 437, of the Public Laws. 

The pleas filed in the case of Deamotares set forth : 

First. That the respondent, at the time mentioned in the com- 
plaint, was and for more than a year had been a resident in and a 
domiciled inhabitant of the City of Newport; and that, having been 
born in the Kingdom of Greece, he had duly declared his intention 
to become a citizen of the United States before the Superior Court 
of the State of Rhode Island, in said Newport, on or about the 27th 
day of February, A. D. 1908, in accordance with the provisions of 
the naturalization laws of the United States, but that he had not then 
been duly naturalized. 

Second. That the acts with which he stands charged in the com- 
plaint were performed by him in the course of his employment as 



52 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

the servant and agent of Diomatares Diomatares, who, at the time 
mentioned in the complaint, was duly licensed under the provisions 
of said section 2 of chapter 437 of the Public Laws. 

It may be observed that the record does not specifically disclose 
the political status of Kofines, Saderas, or Crestodolas, i. e., whether 
aliens or citizens of Rhode Island, or citizens of other states of the 
Union ; that the pleas filed by Raftak disclose the inconsistent claims 
that he is a citizen of Rhode Island who has not resided in this state 
a full year and that he is a citizen of the State of New York and that 
the pleas filed by Deamotares disclose that he is an alien. 

It will be observed that it does not appear in the record of any of 
the cases that any of the respondents have applied for and been 
refused licenses under section 2 of chapter 437. 

The questions brought upon the record and raised in each of the 
cases are identical and are as follows, viz. : 

(1) Are said sections 1 and 2 of said chapter 437 in conflict with 
the provisions of section 17, Article I, of the Constitution of Rhode 
Island, which is as follows, viz. : 

"The people shall continue to enjoy and freely exercise all the 
rights of fishery, and the privileges of the shore, to which they have 
been heretofore entitled under the charter and usages of this state. 
But no new right is intended to be granted, nor any existing right 
impaired, by this declaration," in that the provisions of said sections 
1 and 2, chapter 437, grant to the Commissioners of Inland Fisheries 
the arbitrary right to refuse licenses under said chapter to citizens of 
the State and thereby impair the enjoyment and free exercise of the 
rights of fishery to which the people of the State are entitled under 
said section of the constitution? 

(2) Are said sections 1 and 2 of said chapter 437, in conflict with 
the provisions of Section 10, Article 1, of the Constitution of Rhode 

Island, which is as follows, viz. : " ; nor shall he be deprived 

of life, liberty, or property, unless by the judgment of his peers, or 
the law of the land," in that the provisions of said sections 1 and 2, 
chapter 437, grant to the said Commissioners of Inland Fisheries the 



APPENDIX. 53 

arbitrary right to refuse licenses under said chapter to citizens of the 
state and thereby deprive citizens of liberty and property, contrary 
to the provisions of said section of the constitution? 

(3) Are said sections 1 and 2 of said chapter 437 in conflict with 
the provisions of that portion of section 1, Article 14, of the amend- 
ments to the Constitution of the United States, which is as follows, 
viz.: 

" .... nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or 

property, without due process of law "in that the provisions 

of said sections 1 and 2, chapter 437, grant to the said Commissioners 
of Inland Fisheries the arbitrary right to refuse licenses under said 
chapter to citizens of the State of Rhode Island and thereby deprive 
citizens of liberty and property, contrary to the said provisions of 
said section of the amendments to the Constitution of the United 
States? 

(4) Are said sections 1 and 2 of said chapter 437 in conflict with 
the provisions of Section 17, Article 1, of the Constitution of Rhode 
Island (supra) m that the provisions of said sections 1 and 2 of chap- 
ter 437 deprive such citizens of the state as have resided therein for 
less than one year of the enjoyment and free exercise of the rights of 
fishery to which they are entitled under the provisions of said section 
of the constitution? 

(5) Are said sections 1 and 2 of said chapter 437 in conflict with 
the provisions of Section 10 of Article 1 of the Constitution of 
Rhode Island (supra) in that the provisions of said sections 1 and 2 
of chapter 437 deprive such citizens of the state as have resided 
therein for less than one year of liberty and property contrary to the 
provisions of said section of the constitution? 

(6) Are said sections 1 and 2 of said chapter 437 in conflict with 
the said provisions of Section 1 of Article 14 of Amendments to the 
Constitution of the United States (supra) in that the provisions of 
said sections 1 and 2 of chapter 437 deprive such citizens of the State 
of Rhode Island as have resided therein for less than one year of 
liberty and property contrary to the provisions of said section of the 
amendments to the Constitution of the United States? 



54 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

(7) Are said sections 1 and 2 of said chapter 437 in conflict with 
the provisions of Section 17, Article 1, of the Constitution of Rhode 
Island (supra) in that the provisions of said sections 1 and 2 of chap- 
ter 437 deprive aliens, who have fixed their domicile within the state 
and have resided therein for more than one year, of the enjoyment 
and free exercise of the rights of fishery to which they are entitled 
under the provisions of said section of the constitution? 

(8) Are said sections 1 and 2 of said chapter 437 in conflict with 
the provisions of Section 10, Article 1, of the Constitution of Rhode 
Island (supra) in that the provisions of said sections 1 and 2 of said 
chapter 437 deprive aliens, who have fixed their domicile within the 
state and have resided therein for more than one year, of liberty 
and property, contrary to the provisions of said section of the con- 
stitution? 

(9) Are said sections 1 and 2 of said chapter 437 in conflict with 
the said provisions of Section 1 of Article 14 of amendments to the 
Constitution of the United States (supra) in that the provisions of 
said sections 1 and 2 of said chapter 437 deprive aliens, who have 
fixed their domicile within the State of Rhode Island and have resided 
therein for more than one year, of liberty and property, contrary 
to the provisions of said section of the amendments to the Constitu- 
tion of the United States? 

(10) Are said sections 1 and 2 of said chapter 437 in conflict with 
the provisions of Section 17, Article 1, of the Constitution of Rhode 
Island (supra) in that the provisions of said sections 1 and 2 of chapter 
437 interfere with the rights of citizens to engage in the lobster fish- 
eries in the waters of this state by employing therein such suitable 
servants and agents as they see fit, contrary to the provisions of said 
section of the constitution? 

(11) Are said sections 1 and 2 of said chapter 437 in conflict with 
the provisions of Section 2, Article 4, of the Constitution of the 
United States, which is as follows, viz.: 

"The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and 
immunities of citizens of the several states," in that the provisions of 



APPENDIX. 55 

said sections 1 and 2, chapter 437, interfere with the privileges and 
immunities of citizens of other states by prohibiting them from doing 
manual labor as servants in connection with the lobster fisheries, con- 
trary to the provisions of said section of the constitution? 

(12) Are said sections 1 and 2, chapter 437, in conflict with the 
provisions of that portion of Section 1, Article 14, of the amendments 
to the Constitution of the United States, which is as follows, viz. : 

" No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge 

the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; ", 

in that the provisions of said sections 1 and 2, chapter 437, abridge 
the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States by 
prohibiting them from doing manual labor as servants in connection 
with the lobster fisheries, contrary to the said provisions of said sec- 
tion of the amendments to the Constitution of the United States? 

We approach this subject mindful of the presumption of con- 
stitutionality in favor of the act in question. 

The presumption of innocence in this particular obtains and "The 
rule generally laid down is, that statutes should be sustained unless 
their unconstitutionality is clear beyond a reasonable doubt. A rea- 
sonable doubt is to be resolved in favor of the legislative action, and 
the act sustained. Cooley on Constitutional Limitations, p. 252, and 
cases cited. 'Before an act is declared to be unconstitutional it 
should clearly appear that it cannot be supported by any reasonable 
intendment or allowable presumption.' People v. Supervisors of 
Orange, 17 N. Y. 235, 241. All intendments favor constitutionality,' 
Crowley v. State of Oregon, 11 Oregon, 512. 'Courts will approach 
the question with great caution, examine it in every possible aspect, 
and ponder upon it as long as deliberation and patient attention can 
throw any new light on the subject, and never declare a statute void 
unless the nullity and invalidity of the act are placed, in their judg- 
ment, beyond a reasonable doubt.' Wellington et al.. Petitioners, 16 
Pick. 87, 95, per Shaw, C. J. 'It is but a decent respect due to the 
wisdom, the integrity, and the patriotism of the legislative body by 
which any law is passed,' says Justice Washington, 'to presume in 



56 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

favor of its validity, until its violation of the Constitution is proved 
beyond all reasonable doubt. Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213, 
270.' " Durfee, C. J., in State v. The District of Narragansett, 16 
R. I. 424, 440. 

Therefore it is incumbent upon the respondents to satisfy this court 
beyond all reasonable doubt that the act in question is unconstitu- 
tional in the particulars complained of. 

Another consideration of great importance is the necessity of ascer- 
taining whether the act in question comes within the police power of 
the state. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are held to be 
among the inalienable rights with which all men are endowed by their 
Creator, and that to secure these rights, governments are instituted 
among men. It is therefore evident that the object of society is to 
live, increase, and flourish. It is therefore interested in the preser- 
vation of itself and of its members. "Self-preservation has been 
termed the first law of nature. It is of the most ancient origin: It 
antedates all constitutions and statutes made by man. It is the law 
imder which we live, move, and have our being: it is a law govern- 
ing all persons, natural and artificial. High and low, rich and poor, 
wise and foolish, old and young, are subject to its inexorable sway. 
Obedience to it is rewarded, while disobedience to it is inevitably 
punished. Out of its observance arises the doctrine of the survival 
of the fittest. It is an attribute of all corporations, from the State 
itself down to the least of its creatures. Upon it depends the police 
power of the State, which, in its broadest acceptation, means the 
general power of a government to preserve and promote public 
welfare by prohibiting all things hurtful to the comfort, safety, and 
welfare of society, and by establishing such rules as may be conducive 
of public benefit." Ponte v. Marconi, 27 R. I. 6. 

"Frequently when questions of conflict between national and 
State authority are made, and also when it is claimed that government 
has exceeded its just powers in dealing with the property and con- 
trolling the actions of individuals, it becomes necessary to consider 
the extent and pass upon the proper bounds of another State power, 



APPENDIX. 57 

which, hke that of taxation, pervades every department of business 
and reaches to every interest and every subject of profit or enjoyment. 
We refer to what is known as the poHce power. 

"The police of a state, in a comprehensive sense, embraces its 
whole system of internal regulation, by which the State seeks not 
only to preserve the public order and to prevent offences against the 
State, but also establish for the intercourse of citizens with citizens 
those rules of good manners and good neighborhood which are calcu- 
lated to prevent a conflict of rights, and to insure to each the unin- 
terrupted enjoyment of his own so far as is reasonably consistent 
with a like enjoyment of rights by others." . . . 

"No definition of the powers can be more complete and satisfactory 
than some which have been given by eminent jurists in deciding 
cases which have arisen from its exercise, and which have been so often 
approved and adopted, that to present them in any other than the 
language of the decisions would be unwise, if not inexcusable. Says 
Chief Justice Shaw, 'We think it is a settled principle, growing out 
of the nature of well-ordered civil society, that every holder of prop- 
erty, however absolute and unqualified may be his title, holds it 
under the impHed liability that his use of it shall not be injurious to 
the equal enjoyment of others having an equal right to the enjoyment 
of their property, nor injurious to the rights of the community. All 
property in this Commonwealth is . . . held subject to those 
general regulations which are necessary to the common good and 
general welfare. Rights of property, like all other social and con- 
ventional rights, are subject to such reasonable limitations in their 
enjoyment as shall prevent them from being injurious, and to such 
reasonable restraints and regulations established by law as the 
legislature, under the governing and controlling power vested in 
them by the constitution, may think necessary and expedient. 
This is very different from the right of eminent domain, — the right 
of a government to take and appropriate private property whenever 
the public exigency requires it, which can be done only on condition 
of providing a reasonable compensation therefor. The power we 



58 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

allude to is rather the police power; the power vested in the legislature 
by the constitution to make, ordain, and establish all manner of whole- 
some and reasonable laws, statutes, and ordinances, either with 
penalties or without, not repugnant to the constitution, as they shall 
judge to be for the good and welfare of the Commonwealth, and of the 
subjects of the same. It is much easier to perceive and realize the 
existence and sources of this power than to mark its boundaries, or 
prescribe limits to its exercise.' 

" 'This police power of the State,' says another eminent judge, 
'extends to the protection of the lives, limbs, health, comfort, and 
quiet of all persons, and the protection of all property within the State. 
According to the maxim. Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas, which 
being of universal application, it must, of course, be within the range 
of legislative action to define the mode and manner in which every 
one may so use his own as not to injure others.' And again: (By 
this) 'general police power of the State, persons and property are 
are subjected to all kinds of restraints and burdens, in order to secure 
the general comfort, health, and prosperity of the State; of the per- 
fect in the legislature to do which, no question ever was, or, upon 
acknowledged general principles, ever can be made, so far as natural 
persons are concerned.' And neither the power itself, nor the dis- 
cretion to exercise it as need may require, can be bargained away by 
the State. 

"In the American constitutional system, the power to establish the 
ordinary regulations of police has been left with the individual States, 
and it cannot be taken from them, either wholly or in part, and exer- 
cised under legislation of Congress. Neither can the national govern- 
ment, through any of its departments or officers, assume any super- 
vision of the police regulations of the States. All that the federal, 
authority can do is to see that the States do not, under cover of this 
power, invade the sphere of national sovereignty, obstruct or impede 
the exercise of any authority which the Constitution has confided 
to the nation, or deprive any citizen of rights guaranteed by the 
federal Constitution." Cooley, Const. Lim. 7th Ed. p. 829, et seq. 



APPENDIX. 59 

"There is also a common assent that the legislature has the right 
of control in all matters affecting public safety, health, and welfare, 
on the ground that these are within the indefinable but unquestioned 
purview of what is known as the police power. It is indefinable 
because none can forsee the everchanging conditions which may call 
for its exercise; and it is unquestioned, because it is a necessary 
function of government to provide for the safety and welfare of the 
people. Private rights are often involved in its exercise, but a law 
is not on that account rendered invalid or unconstitutional. The 
first inquiry is whether the subject of the law is within the power; 
for, if it is, the legislature has jurisdiction to enact it and its terms 
are subject to a reasonable legislative discretion." Opinion to the 
Governor, 24 R. I. 603, 605. 

As was said by Tillinghast v. Dalton, 22 R. I. 77-86, in commenting 
upon the definition of "liberty" as given in People v. Gillson, 109 
N. Y. 389: "this inalienable right is trenched upon and impaired 
whenever the legislature prohibits a man from carrying on his business 
in his own way, provided always, of course, that the business and the 
mode of carrying it on are not injurious to the public, and provided, 
also, that it is not a business which is affected with a public use or 
interest." 

Now the subject matter of cap. 437, the act in question, relates not 
merely to a business affected with a public use and interest, but to 
the public use and interest itself. The act purports to be in sub- 
stitution of an act entitled "An act for the better protection of the 
lobster fisheries." By this it means the lobster fisheries of the people 
of the state. One of the fisheries embraced in the great franchise 
orginally granted to the people by the king in the charter and after- 
wards perpetuated to them by the constitution. The words "people 
of the state" have received the following judicial construction: 
" The Constitution in its preamble starts out, ' We, the people of the 
State,' etc. In article 1, section 2, it is declared that all governments 
are instituted for the protection, safety and happiness of the people. 
In the same article, section 6, it is further declared that the right of 



60 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

the people to be secure in their persons, papers and possessions, 
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. 
And again in section 17, 'The people shall continue to enjoy and 
freelj'' exercise all the rights of fishery, and the privileges of the 
shore, to which they have been heretofore entitled under the charter 
and usages of the State,' etc. These illustrations, and others might 
be given, show that the term 'people,' as used in the constitution, is 
broad and comprehensive, comprising in most instances all the 
inhabitants of the State. Article 2 as amended by article 7, however, 
defines the qualifications necessary for electors; and, inasmuch as 
the Constitution provides no mode for obtaining the consent of the 
people except by the expression of it through the votes of the electors, 
we think that the consent of the people mentioned in article 4, section 
13, means the consent of the electors manifested by the majority of 
their votes. We find nothing to warrant its restriction to such of 
the electors as are taxpayers, and we are of the opinion, therefore, 
that the word 'people,' in the section under consideration, is to be 
construed to include registry voters as well as taxpayers." In re the 
Incurring of State Debts, 19 R. I. 610, 613. As all the inhabitants of 
the state, men, women and children, citizens and aliens are interested 
in the franchise, and as all cannot fish for lobsters, and but compar- 
tively few do, it is manifest that if the interests of all are to be con- 
served the fishing must be carried on for the ultimate benefit of the 
people of the state and not merely for the profit and emolument of 
the fishermen engaged in the business, whose conduct in the premises 
must be unselfish enough to include the interests of those who cannot 
personally attend to the matter. According to the United States 
census for the year 1910 the total population of this state was 542,610, 
and according to the report of the Commissioners of Inland Fisheries, 
there were, in the year 1909, engaged in lobster fishing in the public 
waters of the state, 381 men, and there were used for the purpose 
during that year, 248 boats and 23,220 lobster pots. The commis- 
sioners also estimated the number of pounds of lobsters taken in that 
year from the public waters of the state to be 1,395,983. Even if we 



APPENDIX. 61 

should assume the amount to be in round numbers 1,575,000 pounds, 
and estimate the population of the state for the year 1909 to be 
525,000, an equal division by weight of the lobsters taken, among the 
inhabitants of the state, would give each person three pounds. It 
is self evident that each person does not annually get, and never can 
get, his or her proportional part of the total catch of lobsters in any 
year, therefore a division of the catch of lobsters among the people 
of the state cannot be considered to be a feasible way in which to 
preserve the rights of the people in the lobster fishery. If there was 
to be such a division of the catch among the people, it would be proper 
to pay the fishermen a fair price for their labor, a fair return for the 
capital invested, a fair amount for wear and tear of boats, tackle and 
fishing-gear, and such other items as are usually considered in mer- 
cantile adventures of this sort. It goes without saying that people 
of the state residing in portions of its territory remote from the sea- 
shore could hardly afford, even if it were possible for them to do so, 
to go to the shore and attempt to engage in lobster fishing merely for 
the purpose of obtaining what they might deem to be their fair share 
of lobsters from the public waters of the state. All children of 
tender years, the aged and infirm, together with delicate women 
would be absolutely debarred from participation in a fishery in which 
all are interested. In such circumstances it is necessary to consider 
how the people of the state may receive the greatest benefit from the 
•conservation of their interests in this regard. The great majority 
of the people undoubtedly have heretofore bought and in the future 
will be obliged to buy their lobsters, therefore it is for their interest 
to have them plentiful and cheap. And by the immutable law of 
supply and demand, when unhampered by other influences, cheapness 
will result from plenty. Free and unrestrained fishing might, for a 
time, seem to accomplish that result because thereby more lobsters 
would be taken and placed for sale upon the market, but without 
regard to the age, size or condition of the same. Without protection 
from the rapacity of man, lobsters inevitabl}^ must become scarcer, 
and consequently dearer. This has been the costly experience of all 



62 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

countries where the experiment has been tried. The natural tendency 
to kill the goose that lays the golden egg is always exhibited when the 
opportunity is afforded. And when anyone, attempting to stay the 
unsparing hand of the despoiler, suggests that something should be 
saved for posterity he is likely to receive this interrogative reply: 
Why should we care for posterity, what has it ever done for us? 
After us, the deluge. It is necessary that man should be saved from 
the consequences of his own selfishness, thoughtlessness and waste- 
fulness in the matter of fisheries. And for this purpose an ounce of 
prevention is worth a pound of cure. 

In this connection the following quotation from the report of the 
Commissioners of Inland Fisheries for the year 1908, is deemed 
pertinent : 

"The statistics of the lobster fishery, which have been gathered for 
the last five years, are more nearly completed than those of any other 
branch of the fisheries of the State, and, for several reasons, these 
data are just now of paramount importance. For many years this 
industry had been evidently waning, so that the outlook had become 
extremely serious, and numerous and various remedies were sug- 
gested. This was the situation in 1901 when the General Assembly 
passed laws that could be enforced and placed their enforcement in 
the hands of the Commission of Inland Fisheries. These laws, 
designed to protect young lobsters and egg-lobsters, have, since 1901, 
been conscientiously enforced as far as possible by your Commission 
and their deputies. In 1900, also, the lobster propagating establish- 
ment at your Commission's Wickford station began to get practical 
results, which have increased in importance from year to year. Since 
the work of propagation and enforcement of the laws regulating 
lobster fishery began, there has been a remarkable increase in the 
catch of lobsters. This is a fact which is commonly known to all 
those interested, and one which requires no statistical proof. How- 
ever, statistics do confirm this fact and would seem to answer defi- 
nitely the much-discussed question whether or not artificial propaga- 
tion and protective regulation can be effective in maintaining the 
lobster industry. 



APPENDIX. 63 

"The total catch of lobsters in the State has increased from 376,994 
pounds in 1904 to 1,471,344 pounds in 1908, an increase of 1,094,350 
pounds. That this unparalleled increase is not spasmodic or acci- 
dental is evidenced by the steady increase in consecutive years : 
1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 

376,994 499,300 671,914 929,423 1,471,344 

"That the increase is not referable to the introduction of statistics 
from additional localities is shown by the statistics from Newport 
alone, which are summarized as follows: 

1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 

226,994 301,659 353,573 581,189 665,009 

"It is known that the total number of lobster pots has very greatly 
increased, and to this fact one might be inclined to attribute the 
increased catch. The facts are otherwise; for, while the number of 
pots had increased from 7,935 in 1904 to 20,011 in 1908 (more than 
250 per cent.), the catch per pot has not shown a proportionate 
decrease. On the contrary, despite this great multiplication of pots 
the catch per pot not only shows no decrease, but has actually in- 
creased approximate!}' fifty per cent. The following is the catch 
per pot for the past five years: 

1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 

48— 54+ 59+ 76+ 74— 

" Making allowance for the usual feeling of uncertainty in depending 
upon statistics where the issue is close, there can be no reasonable 
doubt that the vast improvement in the condition of the lobster indus- 
try in this State in the last decade is real. For a sharp contrast with 
the situation here, we introduce the following quotation from the 
'Fishing Gazette,' which needs no comment, but which recalls the 
statements of ten years ago regarding the condition of our o^vn lobster 
industry: 'The market for canned lobster continues somewhat de- 
pressed not onl}^ in the American market but also abroad. Stocks 
are fairly heavy. Newfoundland advices are that lobsters are almost 



64 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

completely fished out around the whole coast. Canners who once 
put up three thousand cases cannot produce two hundred now.' 

" 'The St. John's (N. F.) 'Trade Review' says: ''There is no use 
mincing matters. The present deplorable condition of our lobster 
fishery is due entirely to the cowardice of the government, who are 
afraid to carry out the law. They have a regulation calling for a 
defined length of lobster for packing, but they know that this law is 
broken every day in the year; but, fearing to lose the fisherman's 
vote, they will not prosecute. Thus it goes on year after year, the 
available lobsters becoming smaller and smaller, until at present it 
sometimes takes the meat of thirty or forty fish to fill a one-pound 
can.' ('Fishing Gazette,' Jan. '09, p. 103.)' " 

From time to time, for many years, the legislature of this State 
has enacted statutes for the preservation of game and fish and by 
Pub. Laws, cap. 920, passed Mar. 21, 1871, provided for the appoint- 
ment of commissioners of inland fisheries whose duties, inter alia, 
were "to introduce, protect and cultivate fishing in our inland 
waters." The protection of lobsters was afterwards intrusted to 
them and in their report, to the General Assembly for the year 1909, 
it appears that during the preceding eleven years they have been 
engaged in hatching, rearing and liberating lobsters for the benefit 
of the people of the State and that more than a million lobsters have 
been propagated and liberated by them in the past ten years, and 
they claim that for several years their annual output of such lobsters 
had been many times greater than that from any of the several 
stations engaged in like work, both in this country and abroad. It 
also appears from the same report that the expense to the State for 
laboratory, services and expenses of deputies under the lobster law, 
and for egg-lobsters purchased, for that year amounted to over ten 
thousand dollars. The report of said commissioners for the year 
1908, already alluded to, contains the following remarks relative to 
the lobster fishery and also concerning an act which afterwards 
became the statute now under consideration: "On account of the 
present importance of the industry and the increased difficulties and 



APPENDIX. 65 

expense of enforcing the protective legislation, your Commissioners 
have recommended to the consideration of your Honorable Body 
certain changes in the present law which they believe will facilitate 
its enforcement and give a fairer return to the citizens of the State, 
to whom these valuable natural resources belong, and upon whom 
rests the responsibility and expense of maintenance. These recom- 
mendations are embodied in 'An act in substitution of Chapter 969 
of the Public Laws, passed at the January session, A. D. 1902, entitled 
' An act in substitution of Chapter 857 of the Public Laws, passed at 
the January session, A. D. 1901, entitled 'An act for the better pro- 
tection of the lobster fisheries/ " introduced into the Senate. The 
provision in the act substituting, for the present method of measuring 
the lobster from tip of bone on head to the end of tail, the measure- 
ment of the body shell alone, will be of great convenience to fisher- 
men and deputies alike. It leaves the legal length of the lobster 
unchanged, and has the distinct advantage that it will do away with 
the common practice of stretching of lobsters just under the legal 
length. This practice has not only given rise to irritating disputes, 
but has been the means of destroying great numbers of young lobsters 
which are killed by the stretching, whether they prove to be of legal 
length or not. The new method has been in force for a year or more 
in Maine, and has proved very satisfactory. The provision in the 
proposed law requiring all persons engaged in the lobster fishery to be 
licensed is also strongly recommended by your Commissioners. It 
should also be stated that the Conference of the Fish Commissioners 
of the New England States, held in Boston in December, 1908, at 
the instance of Governor Guild, formally and unanimously resolved 
to approve of the licensing of lobster fisherman as an admirable 
procedure, and that the Fish Commissioners of Maine and Con- 
necticut at least, have recommended the provision to their respective 
legislatures. Some of the advantages of the license provision are: 
"The greater ease and accuracy of keeping track of lobster fishermen; 
the providing of an appropriate punishment for willful violation of 
the law, by revoking the license; the partial compensation to the 



66 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

State for the use of these natural resourqes and for the expense of the 
enforcement of the protective legislation. The provision in the pro- 
posed act which limits the privileges of the lobster fishery to citizens 
commends itself to the approval of your Commissioners on the general 
ground that the fishery is one of those natural resources of much 
importance which has not been developed by individual enterprise, 
and also on the ground that the citizens of the State, through their 
General Assembly, are bearing the expense of the maintenance and 
development of the lobster fishery." 

It thus appears that the General Assembly has authorized the 
expenditure of, and that there has been expended, a liberal amount 
of money for the purpose of not only preserving, but if possible of 
increasing the supply of lobsters for the benefit of the people of the 
State. It would be of little benefit to the people of the State if lob- 
sters were hatched, cared for during a critical period of their existence 
and until they attained an age and strength sufficient to enable them 
to protect themselves against their natural foes, if they were to be 
liberated without the protection of the law against the cupidity of 
man. In such circumstances there would be little hope of increase 
on their part. No one will deny that lobsters are animals ferae 
naturae and that those which inhabit the public waters of the State 
are the common property of the people of the State until caught and 
when caught by one having the right to fish for them belong to him 
who thus reduced them to captivity. This condition calls loudly for 
the exercise of the police power of the State if the subject comes 
within the purview of that power. It hardly needs the citation of 
authority to convince any reflecting person that it does, but fort- 
unately authorities are not lacking on the subject and a few will 
suffice. As was said by Mr. Justice, now Chief Justice White, in 
Geer v. Connecticut, 161 U. S. 519, et seq: ''From the earliest tradi- 
tions the right to reduce animals /erae naturae to possession has been 
subject to the control of the law-giving power," and again, "The 
common law of England also based property in game upon the prin- 
ciple of common ownership, and therefore treated it as subject to 



APPENDIX. 67 

governmental authority," and further (p. 527): "The practice of 
the government of England from the earliest time to the present has 
put into execution the authority to control and regulate the taking 
of game. 

"Undoubtedly this attribute of government to control the taking 
of animals ferae naturae, which was thus recognized and enforced 
by the common law of England, was vested in the colonial govern- 
ments, where not denied bj^ their charters, or in conflict with grants 
of the royal prerogative. It is also certain that the power which the 
colonies thus possessed passed to the States with the separation from 
the mother country, and remains in them at the present day, in so 
far as its exercise may be not incompatible with, or restrained by, 
the rights conveyed to the Federal government by the Constitution. 
Kent, in his Commentaries, states the ownership of animals ferae 
naturae to be only that of a qualified property. 2 Kent, Com. 347. 
In most of the States laws have been passed for the protection and 
preservation of game. We have been referred to no case where the 
power to so legislate has been questioned, although the books contain 
cases involving controversies as to the meaning of some of the 
statutes. Commonwealth v. Hall, 128 Mass. 410; Commonwealth v. 
Wilkinson, 139 Penn. St. 298; People v. O'Neil, 71 Michigan, 325. 
There are also cases where the validity of some particular method of 
enforcement provided in some of the statutes has been drawn in ques- 
tion. Kansas v. Saunders, 19 Kansas, 127; Territory v. Evans, 2 
Idaho, 658. 

"The adjudicated cases recognizing the right of the States to con- 
trol and regulate the common property in game are numerous. In 
McCready v. Virginia, 94 U. S. 391, the power of the State of Virginia 
to prohibit citizens of other States from planting oysters within the 
tide waters of that State was upheld by this court. In Manchester v. 
Massachusetts, 139 U. S. 240, the authority of the State of Massachu- 
setts to control and regulate the catching of fish within the bays of 
that State was also maintained. See also Phelps v. Racey, 60 N. Y. 
10; Magner v. People, 97 Illinois, 320; American Express Co., v. 



68 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

People, 133 Illinois, 649; State v. Northern Pacific Express Co., 58 
Minnesota, 403; State v. Rodman, 58 Minnesota, 393; Ex parte 
Maier, 103 California, 476; Organ v. State, 56 Arkansas, 267, 270; 
Allen V. Wyckoff, 48 N. J. Law, 90, 93; Roth v. State, 51 Ohio, St. 
209; Gentile v. State, 29 Indiana, 409, 415; State v. Farrell, 23 Mo. 
App. 176, and cases there cited; State v. Saunders, ubi sup.; Territory 
V. Evans, ubi sup. 

"Whilst the fundamental principles upon which the common 
property in game rests have undergone no change, the development of 
free institutions has led to the recognition of the fact that the power 
or control lodged in the State, resulting from this common owner- 
ship, is to be exercised, like all other powers of government, as a trust 
for the benefit of the people, and not as a prerogative for the advan- 
tage of the government, as distinct from the people, or for the benefit 
of private individuals as distinguished from the public good. There- 
fore, for the purpose of exercising this power, the State, as held by 
this court in Martin v. Waddell, 16 Pet. 367, represents its people, 
and the o^vnership is that of the people in their united sovereignty. 
The common ownership, and its resulting responsibility in the State, 
is thus stated in a well considered opinion of the Supreme Court of 
California : 

" 'The wild game within a State belongs to the people in their 
collective sovereign capacity. It is not the subject of private OAvner- 
ship except in so far as the people may elect to make it so ; and they 
may, if they see fit, absolutely prohibit the taking of it, or traffic and 
commerce in it, if it is deemed necessary for the protection or preser- 
vation of the public good.' Ex parte Maier, ubi sup. 

"The same view has been expressed by the Supreme Court of 
Minnesota, as follows: 

" 'We take it to be the correct doctrine in this country, that the 
ownership of wild animals, so far as they are capable of ownership, 
is in the State, not as a proprietor but in its sovereign capacity as the 
representative and for the benefit of all its people in common.' State 
V. Rodman, ubi sup. 



APPENDIX. 69 

"The foregoing analysis of the principles upon which alone rests 
the right of an individual to acquire a qualified ownership in game, 
and the power of the State, deduced therefrom, to control such 
ownership for the common benefit, clearly demonstrates the validity 
of the statute of the State of Comiecticut here in controversy. The 
sole consequence of the provision forbidding the transportation of 
game, killed within the State, beyond the State, is to confine the use . 
of such game to those who own it, the people of that State. The prop- 
osition that the State may not forbid carrying it beyond her limits 
involves, therefore, the contention that a State cannot allow its own 
people the enjoyment of the benefit of the property belonging to 
them in common, without at the same time permitting the citizens 
of other States to participate in that which they do not own. It was 
said in the discussion at the bar, although it be conceded that the 
State has an absolute right to control and regulate the killing of game 
as its judgment deems best in the interests of the people, inasmuch 
as the State has here chosen to allow the people within her borders 
to take game, to dispose of it, and thus cause it to become an object 
of State commerce, as a resulting necessity such property has become 
the subject of interstate commerce, and is hence controlled by the 
provisions of article 1, section 8 of the Constitution of the United 
States. But the errors which this argument involves are manifest. 
It presupposes that where the killing of game and its sale Avithin the 
State is allowed, that it thereby becomes commerce in the legal 
meaning of that word. In view of the authority of a State to affix 
conditions to the killing and sale of game, predicated as is this power 
on the peculiar nature of such property and its common ownership 
by all the citizens of the State, it may be well doubted whether 
commerce is created by an authority given by a State to reduce game 
within its borders to possession, provided such game be not taken, 
when killed, without the jurisdiction of the State. The common 
ownership imports the right to keep the property, if the sovereign 
so chooses, always within its jurisdiction for every purpose. The 
qualification which forbids its removal from the State necessarily 



70 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES, 

entered into and formed part of every transaction on the subject, 
and deprived the mere sale or exchange of these articles of that ele- 
ment of freedom of contract and of full ownership which is an essen- 
tial attribute of commerce. Passing, however, as we do, the decision 
of this question, and granting that the dealing in game killed within 
the State, under the provision in question, created internal State 
commerce, it does not follow that such internal commerce becomes 
necessarily the subject-matter of interstate commerce, and therefore 
under the control of the Constitution of the United States. The 
distinction between internal and external commerce and interstate 
commerce is marked, and has always been recognized by this court. In 
Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat, 1, 194, Mr. Chief Justice Marshall said: 

" 'It is not intended to say that these words comprehend that 
commerce, which is completely internal, which is carried on between 
man and man in a State, or between different parts of the same State, 
and which does not extend to or affect other States. Such a power 
would be inconvenient and certainly unnecessary. 

" 'Comprehensive as the word 'among' is, it may very properly 
be restricted to that commerce which concerns more States than one. 
The phrase is not one which would probably have been selected to indi- 
cate the completely interior traffic of a State, because it is not an apt 
phrase for that purpose ; and the enumeration of the particular classes 
of commerce to which the power was to be extended would not have 
been made, had the intention been to extend the power to every 
description. The enumeration presupposes something not enumer- 
ated; and that something, if we regard the language or the subject of 
the sentence, must be the exclusively internal commerce of the State. 
The genius and character of the whole government seem to be that 
its action is to be applied to all the external concerns of the nation, 
to those internal concerns which affect the States generally, but not to 
those which are completely within a particular State, which do not 
affect other States, and with which it is not necessary to interfere, for 
the purpose of executing some of the general powers of the govern- 
ment. The completely internal commerce of a State, then, may be 
considered as reserved for the State itself.' 



APPENDIX. 71 

"So, again, in The Daniel Ball, 10 Wall. 557, 564, this court, speak- 
ing through Mr. Justice Field, said : 

" 'There is undoubtedly an internal commerce which is subject to 
the control of the States. The power delegated to Congress is 
limited to commerce 'among the several States,' with foreign nations 
and with Indian tribes. This limitation necessarily excludes from 
the Federal control, commerce not thus designated, and of course that 
commerce which is carried on entirely within the limits of a State 
and does not extend to or affect other States.' 

"The fact that internal commerce may be distinct from interstate 
commerce, destroys the whole theory upon which the argument of the 
plaintiff in error proceeds. The power of the State to control the 
killing of and ownership in game being admitted, the commerce in 
game which the State law permitted, was necessarily only internal 
commerce, since the restriction that it should not become the subject 
of external commerce went along with the grant and was a part of it. 
All ownership in game killed within the State came under this con- 
dition, which the State had the lawful authority to impose, and no 
contracts made in relation to such property were exempt from the 
law of the State consenting that such contracts be made, provided 
only they were confined to internal and did not extend to external 
commerce. 

"The case in this respect is identical with Kidd v. Pearson, 128 
U. S. 1. The facts there considered were briefly as follows: The 
State of Iowa permitted the distillation of intoxicating liquors for 
'mechanical, medicinal, culinary and sacramental purposes.' The 
right was asserted to send out of the State intoxicating liquors made 
therein on the ground that, when manufactured in the State, such 
liquors became the subject of interstate commerce,' and were thus 
protected by the Constitution of the United States; but this court, 
through Mr. Justice Lamar, pointed out the vice in the reasoning, 
which consisted in presupposing that the State had authorized the 
manufacture of intoxicants, thereby overlooking the exceptional pur- 
pose for which alone such manufacture was permitted. So here the 



72 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

argument of the plaintiff in error substantially asserts that the State 
statute is an unqualified right to kill game, when in fact it is only 
given upon the condition that the game killed be not transported 
beyond the state limits. It was upon this power of the State to 
qualify and restrict the ownership in game killed within its limits that 
the court below rested its conclusion, and similar views have been 
expressed by the courts of last resort of several of the States. In 
State V. Rodman, 58 Minnesota, 393, 400, the Supreme Court of Min- 
nesota said : 

" 'The preservation of such animals as are adapted to consumption 
as food or to any other useful purpose, is a matter of public interest; 
and it is within the police power of the State, as the representative 
of the people in their united sovereignty, to make such laws as will 
best preserve such game, and secure its beneficial use in the future 
to the citizens, and to that end it may adopt any reasonable regula- 
tions, not only as to time and manner in which such game may be 
taken and killed, but also imposing limitations upon the right of 
property in such game after it had been reduced to possession. Such 
limitations deprive no person of his property, because he who takes 
or kills game had no previous right of property in it and when he 
acquires such right by reducing it to possession he does so subject 
to such conditions and limitations as the legislature has seeen fit to 
impose.' See, also. State v. Northern Pacific Express Co., 58 Min- 
nesota, 403. 

"So, also, in Magner v. The People, 97 Illinois, 320, 333, the 
Supreme Court of Illinois said: 

" 'So far as we are aware it has never been judicially denied that 
the government under its police powers may make regulations for the 
preservation of game and fish, restricting their taking and molesta- 
tion in certain seasons of the year, although laws to this effect, it is 
believed, have been enforced in many of the older states since the 
organization of the Federal Government. . . . The ownership 
being in the people of the State, the repository of the sovereign au- 
thority, and no individual having any property rights to be affected, 



APPENDIX. 73 

it necessarily results that the legislature, as the representative of the 
people of the State, may withhold or grant to individuals the right 
to hunt and kill game or qualify or restrict as in the opinions of its 
members will best subserve the public welfare. Stated in other 
language, to hunt and kill game is a boon or privilege, granted either 
expressly or impliedly by the sovereign authority — not a right in- 
herent in each individual, and consequently nothing is taken away 
from the individual, when he is denied the privilege at stated seasons 
of hunting and killing game. It is, perhaps, accurate to say that the 
ownership of the sovereign authority is in trust for all the people of 
the State, and hence by implication it is the duty of the legislature 
to enact such laws as will best preserve the subject of the trust and 
secure its beneficial use in the future to the people of the State. But 
in any view, the question of individual enjoyment is one of public 
policy and not of private right.' 

"See also Ex parte Maier, 103 California, 476; Organ v. The State, 
56 Ark. 267., It is, indeed, true that in State v. Saunders, 19 Kansas, 
127, and Territory v. Evans, 2 Idaho, 658, it was held that a State law 
prohibiting the shipment outside of the State of game killed therein 
violated the interstate commerce laws of the Constitution of the 
United States, but the reasoning which controlled the decision of these 
cases is, we think, inconclusive from the fact that it did not consider 
the fundamental distinction between the qualified ownership in game 
and the perfect nature of ownership in other property, and thus 
overlooked the authority of the State over the property in game killed 
within its confines, and the consequent power of the State to follow 
such property into whatever hands it might pass with the conditions 
and restrictions deemed necessary for the public interests. 

"Aside from the authority of the State, derived from the common 
owTiership of game and the trust for the benefit of its people which 
the State exercises in relation thereto, there is another view of the 
power of the State in regard to the property in game, which is equally 
conclusive. The right to preserve game flows from the undoubted 
existence in the State of a police power to that end, which may be 



74 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

none the less efficiently called into play, because by doing so interstate 
commerce may be remotely and indirectly affected. Kidd v. Pearson, 
128 U. S. 1; Hall v. De Cuir, 95 U. S. 485; Sherlock v. Ailing, 93 
U. S. 99, 103; Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1. Indeed, the source of 
the police power as to game birds (like those covered by the statute 
here called in question) flows from the duty of the State to preserve 
for its people a valuable food supply. Phelps v. Racey, 60 N. Y. 10; 
Ex parte Maier, ubi sup.; Magner v. The People, ubi sup., and cases 
there cited. The exercise by the State of such power therefore comes 
directly within the principle of Plumley v. Massachusetts, 155 U. S. 
461, 473. The power of a State to protect by adequate police regu- 
lations its people against the adulteration of articles of food (which 
was in that case maintained), although in doing so commerce might 
be remotely affected, necessarily carries with it the existence of a like 
power to preserve a food supply which belongs in common to all the 
people of the State, which can only become the subject of ownership 
in a qualified way, and which can never be the object of commerce 
except with the consent of the State and subject to the conditions 
which it may deem best to impose for the public good." 

The entire subject is therefore one clearly within the police power 
of the State and the power of the General Assembly in the premises 
is not abridged by the provisions of Article 1, section 17 of the Con- 
stitution. As we said in the case of Payne & Butler v. Providence Gas 
Co., 31 R. I. 295-326: ''No greater privileges were reserved to the 
people than they already had and no powers or rights of the General 
Assembly were thereby abridged. Therefore, the whole subject of 
fisheries, floating and shell-fish, and all kinds of shell-fish, whether 
oysters, clams, quahaugs, mussels, scallops, lobsters, crabs or fiddlers, 
or however they may be known and designated and wherever situate 
within the pubhc domain of the State of Rhode Island, are under the 
fostering care of the General Assembly. It is for the legislature to 
make such laws and regulations, governing the subject of lobster- 
culture, oyster-culture, clam-culture, or any other kind of pisciculture, 
as they may deem expedient. They may regulate the public or private 



APPENDIX. 75 

fisheries. They may even prohibit free fishing for a time and for 
such times as in their judgment it is for the best interest of the State 
so to do. They may withhold from the pubhc use such natural 
oyster beds, clam-beds, scallop beds or other fish beds as they may 
deem desirable. They may make a close time within which no person 
may take shell-fish or other fish, and generally they have complete 
dominion over fisheries and fish as well as all kinds of game. We 
find no limitation, in the constitution, of the power of the General 
Assembly to legislate in this regard, and they may delegate the ad- 
ministration of their regulations to such officers or boards as they may 
see fit." And in the case of State v. Nelson, Ibid, 264, 270, we held 
that the legislature has plenary power in the premises. 

There are many things that cannot be done directly by the in- 
habitants of the State. The framers of the constitution recognized 
the fact that the elective franchise could not be exercised by all of 
the people of the State, and therefoie provision was made in the con- 
stitution of the State for electors who should have the right to vote 
as therein prescribed, and Article II of the Constitution is devoted 
to the purpose of prescribing the qualifications of electors. Among 
the prime requisites therein enumerated are those of citizenship and 
residence in the State for a period of one year, in the case of real estate 
voters, and two years in all other cases. These constitutional pro- 
visions are not only indicative of the will of the people in this par- 
ticular, but may well serve as a guide to the legislature in the con- 
sideration of cognate subjects concerning which the constitution is 
silent. A citizen is one who owes allegiance to the State, is interested 
in its welfare, and therefore is entitled to receive especial consideration 
from the State. Electors are particularly favored. Const. Art. IX, 
sec. 1. "No person shall be eligible to any civil office (except the 
office of school committee), unless he be a qualified elector for such 
office." Even in the law regulating the sale of intoxicating liquor, 
which can hardly be said to be the exercise of a State franchise, 
licenses can only be granted to citizens resident within the State. 
Gen. Laws, 1909, cap. 123, sec. 2. We have already seen that it is 



76 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

impossible for every one of the people of the State personally to 
exercise the franchise of fishing for lobsters in the public waters of the 
State, and that if such fishing is to be done for all it must be done by 
agents in order that the people may receive the benefits thereof. It 
is also clear that the fishery must be regulated in such a manner as 
not to exhaust the supply of lobsters; that the mode and method of 
such regulation is a matter solely for the consideration of the general 
assembly, and that their action in the premises is not subject to review 
except upon constitutional grounds. We are of the opinion that in 
the consideration of the subject the legislature might well follow the 
precedent established in the constitution in regard to the qualification 
of electors and make citizenship and residence within the State 
essential qualifications for the agents to be licensed to fish for lobsters 
upon the public fishing grounds. The public fishing grounds are 
limited in extent and area and the territory within such limits is 
subject to the control of the general assembly. All persons, citizens 
and aliens, residents and non-residents alike, must obey the laws 
enacted by the legislature relative thereto. The territorial limits 
and jurisdiction of the State are defined in Gen. Laws, 1909, cap. 1, 
§§1 and 2, as follows: "Section 1. The territorial limits of this 
state extend one marine league from its seashore at high-water mark. 
When an inlet or arm of the sea does not exceed two marine leagues 
in width between its headlands, a straight line from one headland to 
the other is equivalent to the shore line. The boundary of counties 
bordering on the sea extends to the line of the state, as above defined. 
Sec. 2. The jurisdiction of the state shall extend to, and embrace, 
all places within the boundaries thereof, except as to those places 
that have been ceded to the United States, or have been purchased 
by the United States with the consent of the state." Over the vast 
domain without the territorial limits above defined, the state has no 
jurisdiction and the legislature no control and the hardy fishermen 
of all countries, whether from New England or the Ionian Isles may 
freely fish upon the shoals and ledges beneath the boundless sea for 
the crustaceans that may there be found, without let or hinderance. 



APPENDIX. 77 

No attempt has been made in the statute under consideration to 
impose restrictions upon them outside of the public fishing grounds 
of the state. Without doubt the rights of free fishery, above alluded 
to, have been and will continue to be freely exercised with gain and 
profit, dearly-earned and well-deserved. On the vast highway of 
nations there is ample room and verge enough to exercise the trade 
of fishing to their hearts content, either in the capacity of employer 
or employed and no question of citizenship or residence can arise to 
disturb them. 

In these circumstances we are unable to perceive that the rights 
of any person have been infringed. On the contrary, it seems to us 
that the greatest good of the greatest number will be advanced by the 
legislation complained of. We are therefore of the opinion that the 
constitutional questions aforesaid must be severally answered in the 
negative. We do not find that any of the requirements of the Con- 
stitution of the United States or of the Constitution of this State, 
referred to in the questions certified to us, have been violated by the 
provisions of Pub. Laws, cap. 437, sees. 1 and 2 (passed May 7, 1909). 
So far as appears in these cases no duly qualified citizen has been 
refused a license to fish for the people's lobsters in the public waters 
of the State. For aught that appears all qualified applicants for such 
fishing licenses have received them. We are of the opinion that the 
enactment of the statute in question was a proper exercise of the 
police power by the legislature of the State, in a matter concerning 
only the people of the State, and that it was entirely unnecessary for 
the legislature to consider what effect the statute under consideration 
would have upon aliens, or even upon the citizens of other states, 
because it merely involved the conservation of one species of shell-fish 
in the public waters of the State, a purely local natural resource, and 
that the legislature has full discretion to prescribe the modes and 
methods to be followed in the accomplishment of such conservation. 

Having thus decided the questions certified to us, the papers in 
each case with our decision certified thereon will be sent back to the 
District Court of the First Judicial District for further proceedings. 



APPENDIX B. 



LIST OF FEDERAL AND STATE FISHERIES 
AUTHORITIES. 

1911-1912. 



DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABOR. 
BUREAU OF FISHERIES, WASHINGTON, D. C. 

Commissioner of Fisheries George M. Bowers. 

Deputy Commissioner Dr. Hugh M. Smith. 

Chief Clerk Irving H. Dunlap. 

ASSISTANTS IN CHARGE OF DIVISIONS. 

Inquiry Respecting Food Fishes Dr. H. F. Moore. 

Alaska Fisheries Dr. Barton W. Everman. 

Statistics and Methods Alvin B. Alexander.. 

Architect and Engineer Hector voN Bayer. 

Alabama. 

department of game and FISH. 

John H. Wallace, Jr., Commissioner Montgomery. 

Arkansas. 
no fisheries board. 

Arizona. 

FISH AND game COMMISSIONERS. 

Phoenix, Arizona. 

Theo. T. Swift Safford. 

V. V. Merino Flagstaff. 

W. L. Pinney, Secretary Phoenix. 



APPENDIX. 79 

California. 

board of fish and game commissioners. 

San Francisco, California. 

F. M. Newbert, President Sacramento. 

'Carl Westerfield San Francisco. 

M. J. Connel Los Angeles. 

E. Schaeffle, Secretary San Francisco. 

Colorado, 
department op game and fish. 

J. A. Shinn, Commissioner Denver. 

R. Borcherdt, Deputy Commissioner Denver. 

R. L. Spargur, Chief Clerk Denver. 

W. E. Patrick, Gen. Supt., State Hatcheries Denver. 

Connecticut. 

commission of fisheries and game. 

Room 64, State Capitol, Hartford. 

Frank W. Hewer, M. D., President Groton. 

Frank O. Davis Putnam. 

E. Hart Greer, Secretary Hadlyme. 

CONNECTICUT SHELL FISH COMMISSION. 

Rooms 301-303 Exchange Bldg., New Haven. 

George C. Waldo Bridgeport. 

Christian Swartz South Norwalk . 

John H. Clarke New Haven. 

Delaware. 

commissioner of fish and fisheries. 
Richard C. Carrow Camden. 

Georgia. 

superintendent of fisheries. 
A. T. Dallis La Grange. 

Idaho. 

fish and game department. 

Boise, Idaho. 
Ben. R. Gray, Warden Boise. 

F. M. Kendall, Chief Deputy Twin Falls. 

F. C. CUfif, Clerk Boise. 

George Cornell, Supt., Heyburn Park Chatcolet. 



80 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

Illinois, 
board of fish commissioners. 

R. R. Meento, President Ashkum. 

E. E. Caldwell, Chief Warden Havana. 

S. P. Bartlett, Secretary and Superintendent Quincy. 

Dr. S. A. Forbes, Zoologist Urbana. 

Indiana, 
commissioner of fisheries and game. 
George W. Miles Indianapolis. 

Iowa. 

fish and game warden. 
George A. Lincoln Cedar Rapids. 

Kansas. 

STATE fish and GAME WARDEN. 

Prof. L. L. Dyche Pratt. 

Kentucky. 

No State Fisheries Board. 
Fisheries in charge of the Department of Agriculture, Labor, and Statistics. 

M. C. Rankin, Commissioner Frankfort. 

Louisiana. 

board of bird, game, and fish commissioners. 

605 Maison Blanche Building, Neiv Orleans. 

Frank Miller, President, Ex-officio Chief Warden New Orleans. 

F. J. Grace, Commissioner Baton Rouge. 

W. R. Dodson, Commissioner Baton Rouge. 

L. J. Dussman, Superintendent Oyster Department Opelousas. 

Frank T. Payne, Chief Surveyor New Orleans. 

Amos L. Ponder, Attorney Amite. 

C. S. E. Babington, Secretary Covington. 

Maine. 

commissioners of inland fisheries and game. 

Augusta, Maine. 

J. W. Brackett, Chairman Phillips. 

Blaine S. Viles Augusta. 

Edgar E. King, Secretary Orono. 



APPENDIX. 81 

COMMISSIONER OF SEA AND SHORE FISHERIES. 

James Donohue Rockland. 

Maryland. 

state fish commission. 

John H. Wade, Comviissioner for Western Shore Boomsboro. 

Samuel Twilley, Commissioner for Eastern Shore Pocomoke City. 

Shell Fish Commission. 

SI 1-312 Marine Barik Bldg., Baltimore, Md. 

Walter J. Mitchell, Chairman La Plata. 

Benj. K. Greene, Treasurer Westover. 

Dr. Caswell Grave, Secretary Baltimore. 

Massachusetts. 

commission of FISHERIES AND GAME. 

State House, Boston, Mass. 

Dr. G. W. Field, Chairman Boston. 

George H. Graham, Su'perintendent of Hatcheries Springfield. 

George H. Garfield Brockton. 

Michigan, 
state board of fish commissioners. 

D. H. Power, President Suttons Bay. 

Fred Postal, Vice-President Detroit. 

Walter J. Hunsaker Saginaw. 

Sejrmour Bower, Su'perintendent Detroit. 

STATE GAME, FISH, AND FORESTRY WARDEN DEPARTMENT. 

Major Wm. R. Gates, Warden Lansing. 

David R. Jones, Chief Deputy Warden Petosky . 

Minnesota. 

Board of Game and P'ish Commissioners. 

George J. Bradley, President Norwood. 

Jos. A. Wessel, 1st Vice-President St. Paul. 

O. J. Johnson, 2nd Vice-President St. Paul. 

Henry A. Rider, Executive Agent Little Falls. 

E. W. Cobb, Superintendent of Fisheries St. Paul. 

E. L. Ogilvie, Secretary St. Paul. 

11 



82 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISIIEEIES. 

Mississippi. 

board of oyster commissioners of mississippi. 

Guljport, Miss. 

Duncan Minor, President Ocean Springs. 

F. S. Hewes, Jr., Secretary Gulfport. 

Missouri. 

MISSOURI state fish COMMISSION. 

L. A. Geserich, President St.jLouis. 

Ed. Lee, Vice-President St.^Louis. 

W. S. Willard, Secretary . St. Joseph. 

Edward Willoughby Windsor. 

Richard Porter Paris. 

superintendent of hatcheries. 

Phillip Knopplin St. Louis. 

M. E. O'Brien St. Joseph. 

Montana. 

MONTANA state FISH COMMISSION. 

E. p. Mathewson, Chairman Anaconda. 

George E. Doll, Secretary Pleasant Valley. 

Henry Avare, State Game Warden Helena. 

C. F. Healea, Superintendent State Fish Hatchery, member jex-officio . . .Anaconda. 

Nebraska. 

nebraska game and fish commission. 

Governor, Commissioner ex-officio Lincoln. 

Henry N. Miller, ChieJ Warden Lincoln. 

W. J. O'Brien, Svperintendent of Hatcheries ; Gretna. 

New Hampshire. 

fish and game commission. 

Nathaniel Wentworth, Chairman Hudson Center. 

Charles B. Clarke, Secretary and Financial Agent Concord. 

Frank P. Brown Whitefield. 

Nevada. 

state FISH COMMISSION OF NEVADA. 

Carson, Nevada 
George T. Mills, Chairman Carson. 



APPENDIX. 83 

New Mexico. 

territorial game and fish warden. 

homas P. Gable^ Warden Sante Fe. 

New Jersey. 

fish and game commission. 

Ernest Napier, President East Orange. 

William A. Logue, Treasurer Bridgeton. 

Percival Chrystie High Bridge. 

William A. Faunce Atlantic City. 

Walter H. Fell, Secretary Trenton. 

STATE BUREAU OF SHELL FISHERIES. 

Charles R. Bacon, Chief Haddonfield. 

STATE OYSTER COMMISSION. 

Edmund Stites, Jr Port Morris. 

Ernest L. Mumford Keyport. 

Ogden Sands South Dennis. 

Wilham Schillingsburg Camden. 

Alonzo Bacon, Superintendent and Secretary Mauricetown. 

New York, 
forest, fish, and game commission. 

Albany, N. Y. 

H. LeRoy Austin, Commissioner Catskill. 

John J. Burnham, Deputy Commissioner Essex. 

John D. Whish, Secretary Albany. 

Dr. T. H. Bean, State Fish Culturist New York. 

Clifford R. Pettis Lake Clear. 

North Carolina. 

state fish commissioner, 

Theodore S. Meekins Maneto. 

SHELLFISH COMMISSIONER. 

W. M. Webb Morehead City. 

North Dakota. 

game and fish board of control. 

Herman Winterer. President Valley City. 

J. L. Killion, Vice-President Towner. 

D. I. Armstrong, Secretary Willow City. 

J. B. Eaton Fargo. 

Thomas Griffiths Grand Forks. 



84 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



GAME WARDENS. 

W. N. Smith, Chief Game Warden, District No. 1 . . . Grafton. 

Olaf Bjerke, Chief Game Warden, District No. 2 Abercrombe. 

R. W. Main, State Fish Commissioner Cando. 

Ohio, 
fish and game commissioners. 

Paul North, President Cleveland. 

T. B. Paxton Cincinnati. 

J. F. Rankin South Charlesto. 

Gill McCook Steubenville. 

Walter C. Staley Dayton. 

Oklahoma. 

state fish and game warden. 
John B. Doolin Oklahoma City. 

Oregon. 

boahd of fish and game commissioners. 

Oregonean Building, Portland, Oregon. 

C. F. Stone Klamath Fall. 

George H. Kelley Eugene. 

J. F. Hughes Gold Hill. 

M. J. Kenney Portland. 

C. K. Cranston Pandleton. 

W. L. Finley, State Game Warden Portland. 

R. E. Clanton, Master Fish Warden Portland. 

Pennsylvania, 
department op fisheries. 

W. E. Moehan, Commissioner Harrisburg. 

John Hainberger Erie . 

Henry C. Cox Wellsboro. 

Andrew R. Whitaker Phoenixville. 

W. A. Leisenring Mauch Chimk. 

Rhode Island. 

commissioners of inland fisheries. 

Charles W. Willard, President Westerly. 

WiUiam H. Boardman, Vice-President Central Falls. 

William P. Morton, Secretary Providence. 

Adelbert D. Roberts, Auditor Woonsocket. 

Isaac H. Clarke, Treasurer Jamestown. 

Daniel B. Fearing Newport. 

Wilham R. Rose Tiverton. 



APPENDIX. 85 



COMMISSIONERS OF SHELL FISHERIES. 

Philip H. Wilbour, Chairman Little Compton. 

John H. Northup Apponaug. 

Edward Atchison SlatersviUe. 

Samuel F. Bowden Barrington. 

John C. Wilcox R. F. D., No. 1, Westerly. 

South Carolina. 

the board of fisheries of south carolina. 

James M. Rhett, Chairman Beaufort. 

L. C. A. Roessler Charleston. 

James W. Moore Hampton. 

South Dakota. 

state game warden. 

W. F. Bancroft Pierre. 

Tennessee. 

GAME, fish, and FORESTRY DEPARTMENT. 

Joseph H. Acklen, State Warden Nashville. 

Texas. 

state, game, fish, and oyster commission. 

Wm. G. Starrett, Commissioner Austin. 

Jeff D. Cox, Chief Deputy Austin. 

Utah, 
state, game, and fish commissioner. 
Fred W. Chambers Salt Lake City. 

Vermont, 
commissioner of fisheries and game. 
John W. Titcomb Lyndonville. 

Virginia. 

commission of fisheries. 

W. McDonald Lee, Commissioner Irvington. 

S. Wilkins Matthews, Secretary Oak Hall. 

George B. Keezell Keezleton. 

J. M. Hooker Stuart. 

Bland Massie Tyro. 



86 COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 

Washington, 
department of fisheries and game. 

board of fish commissioners. 

Governor M. E. Hay Olympia. 

State Treasurer, John C. Lewis Olympia. 

STATE FISH COMMISSIONER AND GAME WARDEN. 

John L. Riseland, Office, Daylight Block Bellingham. 

West Virginia. 

forest, game, and fish warden. 
J. A Viquesemy Bellington. 

Wisconsin, 
commissioners of fisheries. 

The Governor, ex-officio Madison. 

Jabe Alford, President Madison. 

A. L. Osborn, Vice-President Oskhosh. 

Dr. E. A. Birge, Secretary Madison. 

B. C. Woltus Appleton. 

Jas. O, Davison Madison. 

George W. Peck Milwaukee. 

Jno. C. Burns La Crosse. 

James Nevin, Superintendent of Fisheries Madison. 

W^YOMING. 
WYOMING FISH COMMISSION. 

John Bailie, Commissioner, District No. 1 Laramie. 

R. O. Schleicher Commissioner, District No. 2 Story. 



APPENDIX C. 



TITLES OF SPECIAL PAPERS PUBLISHED IN THE ANNUAL 
REPORTS OF THE COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISH- 
ERIES OF THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND. 



1. Mead, A. D. The Starfish. (First paper.) Twenty-eighth Annual Report. 1898. 

2. Mead, A. D. The Starfish. (Second paper.) Twenty-ninth Annual Report. 1899. 

3. Tower, R. W. Improvements in the Methods of Preparation of Fish for Shipment. 

Twenty-ninth Annual Report. 1899. 

4. Bdmpus, H. C. The Extension of the Commercial Fisheries of the State. Twenty-ninth 

Annual Report. 1899. 

5. Kellog, J. L. The Life History of the Common Clam. Twenty-ninth Annual Report. 

1899. 

6. Mason, N. R. A List of the Diatoms Found in the Water over the Clam, Mussel, and 

Oyster Beds in Narragansett Bay. Thirtieth Annual Report. 1900. 

7. Mead, A. D. Obsen'ations on the Soft-shell Clam. Thirtieth Annual Report. 1900. 

8. Mead. A. D. Observations on the Soft-shell Clam. (Second paper.) Thirty-first An- 

nual Report. 1901. 

9. RissER,J. R. Habits and Life History of the Scallop. Thirty-first Annual Report. 1901. 

10. Mead, A. D. Habits and Growth of Young Lobsters and Experiments in Lobster Cul- 

ture. Thirty-first Annual Report. 1901. 

11. Mead, A. D. Observations on the Soft-shell Clam. (Third paper.) Thirty-second An- 

nual Report. 1902. 

12. Mead, A. D. Habits and Growth of Young Lobsters and Experiments in Lobster Cultures 

(Second paper.) Thirtj'-second Annual Report. 1902. 

13. Mead, A. D. and Williams, L. W. Habits and Growth of the Lobster and Experiments 

in Lobster Culture. (Third paper.) Thirty-third Annual Report. 1903. 

14. Mead, A. D. and Barnes, E. W. Observations on the Soft -shelled Clam. (Fourth paper.) 

Thirty-third Annual Report. 1903. 

15. Mead, A. D. and Barnes, E. W. Observations on the Soft-shell Clam. (Fifth paper.) 

Thirty-fourth Annual Report. 1904. 

16. Barnes, E. W. Preliminary Inquiry into the Natural History of the Paddler Crab (Calli- 

nectes hastatus) with Remarks on the Soft-shell Crab Industry of Rhode Island. 
Thirty-fourth Annual Report. 1904. 

17. Mead, A. D. Experiments in Lobster Culture. (Fourth paper.) Thirty-fourth Annual 

Report. 1904. 

18. Mr.AD, A. D. Experiments in Lobster Culture, (l^ifth paper.) Thirtj-fifth Annual 

Report. 190.5. 

19. Hadley, p. B. Changes in Form and Color in Successive Stages of the American Lobster, 

Thirty-fifth Annual Report. 1905. 

20. E.mmel, V. E. The Regeneration of Lost Parts in the Lobster. Thirty-fifth Annual 

Report. 1905. 

21. Tracy, H. C. A List of the Fishes of Rhode Island. Plates I-XII. Thirty-sixth Annual 

Report. 1900. 

22. Tracy, H. C. The Common Fishes of the Herring Family. Plates \TI-XI1. Thirty- 

sixth Annual Report. 190C. 



88 APPENDIX. 

■23. Barnes, E W. Methods of Protecting and Propagating the Lobster, with a Brief Out- 
line of its Natural History. Plates XIII-XXVI and XXVIII, XXXI, XXXII, 

XXXVI. Thirty-sixth Annual Report. 1906. 

24. Hadlet, p. B. Regarding the Rate of Growth of the American Lobster. Plates XXVI- 

XXXVII, and XL. Thirty-sixth Annual Report. 1906. 

■2.5. Hadley, P. B. Observations on Some Influences of Light upon the Larval and Earlj' 

Adolescent Stages of Homarus Americanus. Plates XXXVIII-XL. Thirty-sixth 

Annual Report. 1906. 
■27. Emmel, V. E. The Relation of Regeneration to the Molting Process in the Lobster. 

Plates XL-XLI. Thirty-sixth Annual Report. 1906. 
^8. Tracy, H. C. The Fishes of Rhode Island, III. The Fishes of the Mackerel Family. 

Thirty-seventh Annual Report, 1907. 

29. Tracy, H. C. A List of Rare Fishes taken in Rhode Island in the year 1906. Thirty- 

seventh Annual Report, 1907. 

30. Williams, Dr. Leonard W. List of the Rhode Island Copepoda, Phyllopoda, and Os- 

tracoda, with new species of Copepoda. Thirty-seventh Annual Report, 1907. 

31. Emmel; V. E. Regenerated and Abnormal Appendages in the Lobster. Thirty-seventh 

Annual Report, 1907. 

32. Williams, L. W. The Stomach of the Lobster and the Food of Larval Lobsters. Thirty- 

seventh Annual Report, 1907. 

33. Hadley, P. B. Regarding the Beha'vior of the Larval and Early Adolescent Stages of the 

American Lobster. Thirty-seventh Annual Report, 1907. 

34. Barnes, E. W. Lobster Culture at Wickford, Rhode Island, in 1906. Thirty-seventh 

Annual Report, 1907. 

35. Barnes, E. W. Lobster Culture at Wickford, Rhode Island in 1907. Thirty-eighth An- 

nual Report, 1908. 
HQ. Tracy, H. C. The Fishes of Rhode Island V. The Flatfishes. Thirty-eighth Annual 
Report, 1908. 

37. Tracy, H. C. The Fishes of Rhode Island VI. A Description of two young Specimens 

of Squiteague (Cynoscion regalia) with Notes on the Rate of their Growth. Thirty- 
eighth Annual Report, 1908. 

38. Emmel, Victor E. The Problem of Feeding in Artificial Lobster Culture. Thirty-eighth 

Annual Report, 1908. 

39. Tracy. H. C. The Fishes of Rhode Island VII. The Life History of the Common Eel. 

Thirty-ninth Annual Report 1909. 

40. Sullivan, W. E. Notes on the Crabs Found in NarragansetfBay. Thirty-ninth An- 

nual Report, 1909. 

41. Mead, A. D. A Method of Fish Culture and of Transporting Live Fishes. Thirty-ninth 

Annual Report, 1909. (Paper Presented Before the Fourth International Fishery 
Congress, Washington, 1908.) 

42. Mead, A. D. A Method of Lobster Culture. Thirty-ninth Annual Report, 1908. 

(Paper Presented Before the International Fishery Congress Washington. 1909.) 

43. Tracy, H. C. Annotated List of Fishes Known to Inhabit the Waters of Rhode Island. 

Fortieth Annual Report, 1910. 

44. Barnes, E. W. Notes on the Spring and Summer Fishing in Deep Water off Newport, 

During the Years 1905-1909. Fortieth Annual Report. 1910. 

45. Barnes, E. W. The Plague of Sea Clams at Easton's Beach, Newport. Fortieth 

Annual Report, 1910. 

46. Hadley, P. B. Additional Notes Upon the Development of the Lobster. Fortieth 

Annual Report, 1910. 

47. Barnes, E. W. Revised Edition of Methods of Protecting and Propagating the Lob- 

ster, with a Brief Outline of its Natural History. Plates IV-XXIV. Forty-first An- 
nual Report, 1911. 



3 2044 072 182 26