[G.S. Sutherland, 16,805.]
It seems to be fairly deducible from this evidence, that cash payments for fish are not impracticable and inexpedient, as some witnesses have said. The condition of fishermen in Wick and the West Highlands shows further that Shetland is not, as has sometimes been thought, a peculiar and exceptional country. Elsewhere also fishermen have crofts, are poor, and in debt; require advances for boats, fishing implements, and provisions; and obtain them from or through the curers to whom they sell their fish. The evidence given before the Select Committee on the Irish Sea Fisheries Bill of 1867 shows that the condition of many fishermen on the Irish coast is worse in regard to indebtedness than that of any in Shetland.
The question may then be asked, whether a partial and local remedy should be applied to Shetland, while nothing is done for the fishermen of other districts; and whether it is expedient to pass an Act of Parliament for the protection of a particular trade in a single county, unless it be fully ascertained that its circumstances are materially different from those of the same trade in the rest of the empire. It is for Her Majesty's Government to decide whether it can introduce a measure for the repression of truck, and the regulation of agreements between fishermen and their employers, without having information as to the nature of the present relations between these parties throughout the empire.
There is a good deal to lead to the conclusion, if any general conclusion may be formed from a local and partial investigation, that fishermen and fish-curers may fairly be subjected to regulations analogous to those which the Merchant Shipping Act lays down for the engagement of seamen. It is also a point worthy of consideration, whether the prohibition of set-off should not be extended to all dealings between fishermen and fish-merchants, with this exception, that the curer or merchant should be at liberty to retain one third of each week's or month's earnings for payment of any boats or lines supplied to the fishermen by him or on his guarantee. The carelessness or incompetence of fishermen in regard to pass-books and accounts, suggests also the propriety of a limitation of action upon such accounts to three months, with a provision that no acknowledgments shall bar prescription unless holograph, or signed before witnesses.
LAND QUESTION.
I have not thought myself at liberty to enter upon the land question in Shetland as substantive part of the inquiry; but it is plain that the prevalence of truck is due in no small degree to the habit of dependence, or submission, which the faulty relations between landlords and tenants have fostered. Here, too, however, it may perhaps be said that legislation ought not to be of a local and exceptional character. I may at least be permitted to hope that, in any reform of the land tenancy laws of Scotland, the case of Shetland will not be forgotten.
The introduction of a class of peasant proprietors seems impossible, except by some measure resembling the 44th clause of the Irish Land Act, 1870; while the sudden expulsion of the present population, and the substitution of sheep, would probably be destructive to the fishing industries as they now subsist. But the present insecurity of tenure is not consistent either with the permanent interests of the land (in which the country still more than the landlord is concerned), or with the formation or maintenance of a race of independent and intelligent citizens. Probably a law of landlord and tenant, passed with no arrière pensee as to maintaining the authority of the landlord, but with the honest intention of reconciling the rights and interests with the independence of both parties to the contract, would not permit the landlord to evict without cause upon forty days' warning. It may even be maintained that in the present state of agricultural science, no tenure for so short a period as one year ought to be permitted. Farmers of the larger class, however, are or ought to be able to protect themselves in their bargains with landlords; and as this Report has nothing to do with such tenant farmers, they may be left out of the question. But in the case of small fishermen farmers, it is worthy of consideration whether a warning of at least one year, excepting cases of insolvency or specified kinds of misconduct, ought not to be required before eviction from any agricultural holding below a certain rental; and whether in such holdings tenants should not have some summary means of recovering from the landlord or succeeding tenant any extraordinary expenditure they make upon their land or houses.
. (Signed) W. GUTHRIE.
EDINBURGH, <June> 15, 1872
APPENDIX to COMMISSION ON THE TRUCK SYSTEM
(SHETLAND).