15,755. But the men might be bound to fish for you all the season, although they were paid weekly?-I would not care to engage anybody then for the season. I would have a station at a certain place, [Page 397] with weights there, and I would pay for the fish as I got them.

15,756. Was that the nature of the offer which you made to the fishermen, and which they would not accept?-Yes. We would have no hold over the fishermen in that case at all.

15,757. Would it not be quite practicable to engage the men for the whole season and to pay them weekly?-It would be quite practicable.

15,758. Have you made an offer to them of that description?- Yes; we have made an offer to some fishermen who fish for us now.

15,759. Did you offer to engage them to fish for you for the whole season?-Yes. If they commenced, they would never think of changing.

15,760. In that case would there be any reluctance on the part of the fish-curer to make an advance to the men in a bad week if they were bound to fish for him over the whole season?-I should not care to do it because they might get no more fish after a certain date. At the end of the year the weather is very often such that the men cannot go off for weeks, and we might be advancing on the prospect of what never came, and then the men would be in debt.

15,761. In the case you refer to, were the fishermen not willing to accept your offer?-They were not willing.

15,762. Do you think it would have made any difference in that respect if the offer had been to pay a proportion of the price-say a minimum price of 5s. 6d. or so for ling-and that the balance should be paid according to the current price at the end of the season?-I don't know how that would do. I never spoke about that with the men. I think that would be giving them two chances. It would be giving them the cash, and then giving them the full value of the market after I had paid out my cash so much sooner than I would otherwise have done. When a thing is sold, it is sold, and you take your chance either to lose or to gain, but in that case the fishermen would have the cash in their hands, and they would also have the chance of benefiting by a rise in the price.

15,763. But in other trades, merchants have to lay out their cash in wages and take their chance of a return?-Yes; and I would do the same.

15,764. You would do the same if the men were paid wages, but would you not be prepared to make part of the wages dependent upon the market price of the fish?-No. I hold that in a business transaction, if a party agrees to sell, and you agree to purchase, the one takes his chance, and you take your chance too. That would bring each party to an understanding of how matters stood between them. If it was the practice altogether to purchase the fish green, and to pay for them in money, there would be so many people in competition for them that the men would be sure to get the full value, because, if I gave 6d. more, another man would be sure to give 6d. more if he could afford it, and the men would not lose by that. The fish would go up to the very top price, and the men would reap the advantage.

15,765. Do you think there would be always two or three competing merchants at each station?-Certainly there would. The stations are only half a mile apart; and if one man would not offer the price, another would do so.

15,766. Are your curers paid by weekly wages?-We have one curer paid by weekly wages.

15,767. Do you cure by contract?-Yes, as well as by wage.

15,768. How many people are employed in your curing establishment during the season?-I cannot say, because some go on for a week or two, and others go on at the end of that time; but we will have as high as forty and as low as twenty people who are not off work.

15,769. How are these people paid?-They are paid weekly by a daily wage on Saturday night.

15,770. Do they receive payment of their whole wages in cash?- Every penny.

15,771. Are they paid in cash even if they have had out-takes during the week?-They have no out-takes; we don't give them.

15,772. Is yours the only establishment in Shetland, so far as you know, where that is the practice?-So far as I know, I believe it is; but I am not certain. The only other one where I thought it was done was Leask's; but I happened to be present last day when Mr. Robertson was examined, and I heard him say that they did give credit, which I did not know before.

15,773. Has it been long the practice in your establishment not to give credit to your weekly workers?-It has been the practice for about five years.

15,774. Have you found it to facilitate your transactions very much?-Yes; and it was for that reason we gave up the practice of giving credit. When we first commenced to cure at Bressay, we paid by weekly wages; but the people usually wanted some advances before the Saturday night, and we found in a short time that we were losing money by bad debts while a great deal of time was involved in settling with them on the Saturdays. In fact it took up so much time, and caused so much trouble, that we stopped it altogether.

15,775. How did the bad debts occur?-The girls wanted to take up clothing, and on Saturday night they required food for another week, and we found they took up too much.

15,776. Have you found that the people are now contented with the system which you have introduced?-They are quite contented.

15,777. They don't come to you wanting out-takes?-Never.

15,778. Do you find they get on quite comfortably under the present system?-Yes. What took us hours before to settle, we can settle now in the course of half an hour.

15,779. Don't you think the fishermen might manage to get on under the cash system if it were introduced in the same way that you have done with your workers in the curing establishment?- The fishermen are different thing. The fish have first to be caught before they are paid for; whereas, in the other case, the people are engaged for a weekly wage, which they are certain to get.

Lerwick, January 30, 1872, CHARLOTTE JOHNSTON, examined.

15,780. You live at Colafirth, near Ollaberry?-Yes.

15,781. How long have you lived there?-I was born at Colafirth, but I came to Lerwick when I was 25 years of age, and I was here for 17 years.

15,782. What did you do in Lerwick?-We kept a few boarders and lodgers.

15,783. What do you do now in Colafirth?-I have been employed scouring or dressing hosiery for the most part, and I generally had to go to one man with it for 10 years, except two months. I commenced on 1st. June 1861, and stopped on 8th April 1871.

15,784. Who did you dress hosiery for?-Chiefly for Mr. Morgan Laurenson, Lochend.

15,785. Do you also knit?-Yes.

15,786. Were you always paid for that in goods?-Yes.

15,787. Did you get them at Mr. Laurenson's shop at Lochend?- Yes.

15,788. Do you also deal sometimes at the shop at Ollaberry?- Yes.

15,789. Have you an account there?-Yes. I have had a good many accounts. I think the first account I had with Mr. Laurenson was in 1863.

15,790. Were these accounts settled regularly?-No; that was the mistake. I wanted to settle regularly after a few months, when I got home perhaps from 10 to 20 dozen, but he ran on the accounts for perhaps 14 or 15 months, so that I did not know whether I was going ahead or going back.

15,791. This account [showing] was settled on [Page 398] December 31, 1864: 'By contra., 7, 10s. 9d.' What was that due you for?-I had scouring, and I had two tatted rugs, and I knitted cloth.

15,792. I see the account is settled again on March 31, 1866: were you still working at the same things?-Yes.

15,793. The work you did was put at the end of the book?-Yes.

15,794. The book you have shown me is a very carefully kept pass-book, is it not? Is there anything wrong in it?-I was not satisfied, and therefore I kept it.

15,795. Why were you not satisfied with it?-I thought he charged me too much for my groceries, and gave too little for my dozens of scouring.

15,796. Could you not have fixed your price for your scouring yourself?-No, I did not get the chance. He did it all himself, because he had both sides of the question.

15,797. But you had no need to work for a less wage than you thought was fair. Could you not have gone somewhere else with your work?-He always thought I should work to him. I could have gone to many a place else, and got work and been paid for it what I thought was a fair price, but he thought I should still have to stay and work for him.

15,798. Why did he think so?-I suppose he thought he got as well done to by me as he could have got done to him by another.

15,799. But he could not oblige you to do anything you did not choose to do?-When I would refuse to do what he wanted me to do at a time when I was up myself, he would send the things to me in a box to be done.

15,800. But you did not need to dress the goods unless you got what you thought was a fair price for them?-I had to do it, because I had to work for my own maintenance.

15,801. Are the pass-books you have produced the only pass books you have?-Yes.

15,802. The next one is for 1868 and 1869. Is with Mr. Laurenson too?-Yes.

15,803. It is only brought down to October 1869. Have you had no pass-book since then?-No; I wanted to stop work then because I was not well.

15,804. Have you got no supplies from Mr. Laurenson since 1869?-Yes; I have got an account of them. [Produces account.]

15,805. When was the account settled last?-I think it was in April or May 1871; perhaps it may have been in June.

15,806. On May 16, 1870, I see you are charged 8d. for oatmeal: how much was that for?-4 lbs.

15,807. Were you told at the time you got it what the price of it was to be?-No; I did not know at the time how much it was to be.

15,808. On June 27 you are charged 2s. for tea: how much was that?-Half a pound.

15,809. Do you buy 4s. tea at Lochend?-We have bought 5s. tea at Lochend, but that was in 1863.

15,810. Is it very fine tea that you get at 2s. per 1/2 lb.?-We ask for the best that is in the shop.

15,811. Are you quite content with the quality of it?-We must just take it as it is, because we have no means of going anywhere else. I have a sample of it here. [Produces sample of tea.]

15,812. Is that 4s. tea?-No, it is 4s. 4d. tea. That [producing line] is the line they gave us for the goods we got on the 22d of this month. [Witness produces line in the following form

s d By hosiery 2 0 Tea 1 1 0 11 Rice 0 31/2 0 71/2 Sugar 0 21/2 0 5

s d 0 5 Soda 0 1 0 4 Soap 0 11/2 0 21/2 Cloves 0 1 0 11/2 Sugar and tobacco 0 11/2

15,813. Where do you say you got these goods?-At Lochend, from Mr. Laurenson.

15,814. You took him 2s. worth of hosiery?-Yes.

15,815. How much tea did you get for 1s. 1d?-A 1/4 lb.

15,816. How much rice did you get for 31/2 d?-1 lb.

15,817. How much sugar did you get for 21/2 d?-1/4 lb.

15,818. Did you pay him 21/2d. for it?-Yes

15,819. Was that loaf sugar?-Yes; I have a sample of it.

15,820. How much soap did you get?-The soap was 6d. per lb. [The witness here produced a sample of the tea for which she had paid 1s. 1d. per 1/4 lb.; a sample of the loaf sugar for which she had paid 21/2d. per 1/4 lb.; a sample of the rice for which she had paid 31/2d. per lb.; a sample of the soap for which she had paid 6d. per lb.; and a sample of flour for which she paid 2d. per lb. These were all docketed by the clerk as having been produced by witness, and purchased from Mr. Laurenson's shop at Lochend.]

15,821. Did Mr. Laurenson know that you were to bring these goods here?-No.

15,822. Did you get them for your own use?-Yes.

15,823. Were you asked by your summons to bring them here?- Yes.

15,824. Are the articles which you get at the shop at Ollaberry of the same quality as you get at Lochend?-Mr. Irvine, who keeps the shop there, is very kind to me. If I want all cash at any time, he gives it; and Mr. George Henry and Mr. William Smith have also been very kind to me. They would give me cash at any time on my hosiery if I asked for it.

15,825. Are you quite sure that the samples you have produced were got at the same price that is charged for similar goods in your account by Mr. Laurenson?-The prices in the account are those which are charged when the goods are given for work, but the samples I have produced were given in exchange for hosiery.

15,826. Are there two prices for goods at that shop?-Yes, they always charged two prices. When we pay for goods in hosiery, they are always above the price which is charged when cash is paid for them.

15,827. Do you get the goods cheaper when you pay for them by your work, such as you are dressing, than when you are selling hosiery?-Yes. The price is then perhaps 1d. less for the 1/4 lb. of tea.

15,828. How do you know that?-Because I see it marked.

15,829. Was the tea for which you were charged 4s. 4d., when you paid for it by hosiery, the same tea that is charged 4s. in the account?-I think so.

15,830. Are you not sure of it?-I did not see them take it out of the chest. I asked them for the same tea, but I don't know if they gave the same kind.

15,831. But did you ask for the best tea in the shop in both cases?-Yes, I always do.

15,832. Then all you know is that you asked for the best tea in the shop, and it was charged 4s. 4d. when you gave hosiery for it, and it was charged 4s. when it was put into your account for dressing?-That is all I know; but it is a very short time since it was 4s. 4d. It was always 4s. 8d. before.

15,833. I see that on September 29, 1870, you are charged 1s. 6d. for oatmeal: was that a peck?-Yes.

15,834. Were you paying 1s. 6d. for the peck of oatmeal at that time?-Yes; and I suppose there were others paying it as well as me.

15,835. Would you have paid the same for it in any other shop in the neighbourhood?-No. It was dearer [Page 399] than if I had had the cash and gone into another shop to get it.

15,836. What did you say when you went to Mr. Laurenson with the hosiery which you sold to him on the 22d?-It was my sister who went, not me.

15,837. Did she tell you what she said?-I don't think it.

15,838. Are you quite sure your sister did not say what the goods were wanted for?-I told her what goods to ask for, and she got what I told her to get.

15,839. Did you tell her what you were to do with them?-No; I had not got the summons then.

15,840. Would you have got these goods from Mr. Laurenson even although you had not got the summons?-Yes.

15,841. Did you want them for your own use?-Yes. I got them on the Monday, and I did not get the summons until the Tuesday night.

15,842. You have not brought the whole of the goods which you bought then. You have merely brought samples from what you bought?-Yes. I was only told in the summons to bring samples.

15,843. Was the note which you have produced, given in the shop at the time when the goods were bought?-Yes. The shop lad marked down the things on that slip of paper and gave it to my sister, so that she might show me what she had got, and what the prices were.

15,844. You have handed me a letter from one Laurence Clark, dated 25th January 1872, in which he says, 'I have to inform you that I built Miss Charlotte Johnston a house in 1863, and I could not get 1s. from her, because she wrought all her work to Mr. Laurenson, at dressing hosiery, and could not get so much cash as 1s. Therefore I had to take anything that she had to give me, that could do me any good. That kind of payment is not so good as cash.'-For what purpose was this letter written?-It is merely a line from the man who built my house, to show that I could not get cash with which to pay him.

15,845. What did you pay Clark with for building your house?-I got meal, tea, tobacco, sugar, and anything that was in the shop at the times which he required; but I had to reduce the goods to him to cash price, because he would have required his money of me, and I did not have it to give him.

15,846. What was the price charged for building your house altogether?-He charged 15d. a day and his food; I think it came to about 2.

15,847. Did you give him a great deal more in goods, according to the price which was charged to you for them?-Yes. I gave him six yards of cloth for jacket, and other things.

15,848. I see there is a lot of tobacco entered in your book about 1863?-Yes; that was for the men who were working at the house.

15,849. When was the house finished?-It is about eight years in October since it was done.

15,850. I see there is some tobacco in December 1864. Was your house finished before then?-No. It was finished outside, but not inside. We went into it in October, but the windows were not in, and it was two years before I was able to get the flooring put in one of the ends of it.

15,851. Did you give him a little tobacco every now and then until it was finished?-Yes; but he got other things besides tobacco.

15,852. Does that account for the entries of tobacco in August and September 1865 in your book?-Clark was paid by that time, but I had to get my house thatched.

15,853. Was it not to pay him that you got that tobacco?-It was either to pay him or some one else who was working for me. I did not have any money; and when any one did any job for me, I had to pay them in some way or other.

15,854. What did you give them besides tobacco?-I sometimes had a few dishes that they required, and they took them or tea.

15,855. Does that account for there being so many entries of tea in your book?-Yes. I got wool and potatoes for tea.

15,856. At the settlement in July last there was a balance due by you to Mr. Laurenson?-Yes.

15,857. Have you not been working to him since?-I was not able to work.

15,858. About a month ago you got a notice from him that you would be summoned to court unless you paid the balance of your debt, 14s. 31/2d?-Yes; but I did not expect that I should have had anything to pay.

15,859. Did you think the balance was in your favour?-Yes, I expected that.

15,860. But you were running up an account, and you did not know?-Yes, but that was not my blame. I always wanted a settlement; and if he had paid me for my work and my goods, I would not have been due him anything.

15,861. When did you leave home?-I left home on Thursday, and came by the steamboat. I did not go on board of her at Ollaberry until Saturday night, but I had left home two days before, and had to wait for her.

15,862. How old are you?-I was fifty-two in July.

15,863. You are not in good health, and you are not able to walk a long distance?-No. I cannot walk far on account of the rheumatics.

15,864. Have you any idea when you will get home?-No.

15,865. Do you intend to go back by the steamboat if you can?-If the steamboat goes I will go with her but if not, I will have to stay until the packet comes back from Northmaven.

.-I have to give notice that I do not think at present that I shall summon any more witnesses to appear in Shetland; but there will be a meeting at half-past nine o'clock, and if any one wishes to make any statement, or to bring forward any additional evidence, he will then have an opportunity of doing so.

.

LERWICK: WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 31, 1872.

JOHN GATHERER, examined,

15,866. You have been for a long time Collector of Customs at Lerwick?-I have. Before questioning me, I would like if you would allow me to make a brief preliminary remark or two which may render clear any after-evidence which you may call upon me to give. At the time when certain gentlemen tendered their evidence on Shetland truck before the Commission at Edinburgh, I read the brief, necessarily imperfect, and probably inaccurate reports of the same which appeared in the Edinburgh weekly papers. I also read some articles and letters which appeared in the newspapers at the time. About seven months ago I read, as printed I think in a Parliamentary blue book, the report of Mr Hamilton to the Board of Trade about the discharge of the Shetland whaling seamen at this port. I have never read the report since. On my return from the, mainland last summer, I found a gentleman had left in my house a copy of the evidence, as [Page 400] printed in a pamphlet form. I think the pamphlet contained a report of Mr. Arthur Hay's adverse evidence; but I had not time to read it before I posted the pamphlet to a friend in the south. I therefore never read his evidence. Beyond a brief newspaper paragraph, which I read recently, I literally know nothing as to the evidence which has been given under the present inquiry. I purposely kept aloof from the same, and from inquiring about the same. I appear here very reluctantly on the present occasion, and, as you are aware, I would not have appeared at all had I not been cited. I have several reasons for this reluctance to appear: I will mention two of them. I entertain very strong opinions condemnatory of the truck system, which I believe prevails all over Shetland; but I do not wish personally to have anything to do with the matter, directly or indirectly. I think it is to be regretted that the question as to the mode of paying the whaling seamen should have been introduced at in the Edinburgh evidence, and complicated by being mixed up with the general question of truck. Both questions, I think, should have been treated separately, as they are the subject of distinct laws and regulations, these laws at the same time being administered by distinct departments. From what I have already stated, you will see that I have a very imperfect recollection of the statements in Mr. Hamilton's report, but I recollect my impression of it at the time when I read it. It was, that the statements in the report were essentially correct representations of what had taken place at one time or other at Lerwick. I have heard that some one has questioned the accuracy of some portions of his report. It might be liable to misconception in this respect. When he inspected my office, we talked generally over the objectionable system that had so long prevailed here in the mode of discharging and paying off the men. A great deal of this must have been patent and notorious to Mr. Hamilton, as a former resident in Shetland, and having subsequent intercourse with the same; and he may not possibly, in his narrative of this to the Board of Trade, have clearly separated some of the past and the suppressed practices of the agents, and those of more recent date. This would the more readily occur, as I have reason to believe that at the time he prepared his report he was not aware that I had over a number of years repeatedly and fully reported the whole matter to the Board of Trade. I have here with me a report relative to the discharge of whaling crews during the last year, and some returns relative to the same, and for previous years, which I hurriedly prepared with the view of sending to the Board of Trade by the mail, which I expected would have sailed yesterday. When preparing the same, I was not expecting I would have to give evidence on the subject. I do not wish to hand in the documents, but I may have occasion to refer to them.

15,867. You showed me these returns last night, and allowed me to see the report which you were sending to the Board of Trade?- I did.

15,868. You are satisfied, I presume, as to the substantial correctness of these returns?-Yes, of my own report and the returns. There is a difficulty in preparing them, from the time that has elapsed; but, as you are aware, I have asked them to verify the accuracy of them at the proper quarter.

15,869. Subject to that verification, you believe these returns to be correct?-Yes. They were prepared by myself and those in any office from the records.

15,870. Therefore, if any application should be made to the Board of Trade afterwards for production of these returns under this Commission, you have no objection to their being regarded as part of your evidence given upon oath?-None; and in continuation of the report, I will refer to the fact that I have been examined before you.

15,871. You are aware that before 1867 the wages of seamen returning from Greenland voyages and landed in Shetland were never paid at the Custom House?-In some cases they were, but very seldom.

15,872. Do you also know from your own observation, and from what you heard at the time, that those seamen were generally running large accounts with the agents, by whom they were secured for these sealing and whaling voyages?-I was aware of that from the statements of the seamen, themselves.

15,873. In numerous cases?-Yes, in numerous cases.

15,874. In almost every case?-I believe so.

15,875. In what way did these statements come to be made to you?-The seamen often came and complained to me that they were not paid off. It may perhaps be proper to explain that at that time, before the special Board of Trade regulations were issued, the masters should have come and paid off the seamen. I may add further, that I am aware that every means was taken by the agents to keep the masters of the Peterhead and Dundee vessels from coming and discharging their men in cases where it would have been attended with no inconvenience.

15,876. In what way did you become aware of that?-I got numbers of letters from the masters stating that they were unable to attend themselves with the men. These letters, so sent to me, were often written by the agents, but signed by the masters.

15,877. Did you know them to be in the handwriting of the agents?-Yes, or of their clerks; and on inquiring at the captains when they came back to engage men again, some of them told me that the agents desired them to do so.

15,878. Not to pay the men?-Yes, not to pay the men. In these letters they stated that they often wished the men to appear, but that they (the men) ran away home; which statement the men subsequently told was incorrect.

15,879. At that time, was the payment of these Greenland seamen at Lerwick subject to the same general regulations which were in force in other parts of the empire?-Yes. There were instructions to shipping masters at that time.

15,880. Were these the same regulations that are still in force in other parts of the kingdom?-Yes.

15,881. They are still in force everywhere, except in Lerwick?- Yes. They are still in force, except in the case of Shetland, Orkney, and the port of Stornoway. I may mention that the procuring of seamen, by agents was at that time, and is still in other places, illegal and punishable by fine-that is, according to the Merchant Shipping Act of 1854. I believe the mode in which they then acted would in the south be treated as crimping; and allow me to say also, that the offence was rendered greater by the fact of the agents being merchants and supplying the men with goods.

15,882. I believe there is a prohibition of that?-Yes; and even licensed agents-that is, individuals licensed by the Board of Trade-are not allowed to be so if they have dealings with the men. That also is under the Act of 1854.

15,883. The regulation at the time you speak of, although it was not observed, was, that the men should be paid before the superintendent?-Yes, then called the shipping master.

15,884. That officer in this case was yourself, as there is no local marine board here?-Yes.

15,885. Why was the regulation not observed?-I am satisfied it was from the agents desiring to secure the profits on the supplies of the men.

15,886. Had you made frequent endeavours to enforce compliance with the Act?-Yes.

15,887. You reported repeatedly to the Board of Trade on the subject?-Yes. I may mention that, when I came here first, there was an attempt on the part of some of the agents to introduce their accounts into the men's accounts of wages, which I checked, and which I believe then led to the shipmasters not appearing.

15,888. That was many years ago?-It is a good many years ago. In some cases these accounts were introduced under the name of ship's accounts.

15,889. Was not that done as late as 1867, after the regulations had been modified? At least I was told that in some cases the agents had introduced their own accounts among the captain's stores in the ship's store-[Page 401]book?-I suspect that was done to a trifling extent, although I should not like to say decidedly that it was done.

15,890. Was there not a clause introduced in 1868 by which that was distinctly prohibited?-There were some defects in the regulations, and they were altered in order to meet the attempts made to evade them.

15,891. Since 1867 has the system been materially changed by the regulations then introduced by the Board of Trade?-Yes, materially.

15,892. The seamen now receive their full payment in cash in your presence?-They do.

15,893. Although not at the time required by the Act?-There is great delay in many cases.

15,894. That is said by several witnesses who have appeared here, to be due to the reluctance of the men to come forward, and their desire to go home and see their friends as soon as they are landed: is that so?-To a great extent, I do not believe that.

15,895. Have you any reasonable doubt that if the men were instructed by the master of the ship and the agents to go at once to the Custom House for payment of their wages, they would obey that direction?-I believe from my knowledge of the men, that if the master and the agent decidedly told them to go to the Custom House after being landed, they would go. There is no doubt that men after a long voyage are naturally anxious to get home; but if they knew they had to be paid then, they would readily accede to the request of the master and the agent.

15,896. Is there any reason you can assign, from your acquaintance with the practice in paying seamen's wages, why the accounts should not be all ready within the time allowed by the law?-My whole experience in the matter points to the fact that the agents are unwilling to have a speedy settlement, and that unless compelled they would never appear at the Custom House at all, or rather I should say at the Mercantile Marine Office.

15,897. Have you had occasion since 1868 to know that the seamen are still incurring large accounts, or considerable accounts, to the agents by whom they are secured?-I have endeavoured not to be cognisant of any of their dealings; but I may add further, that I believe, although the special regulations are outwardly and nominally complied with the agents still secure their accounts from the men for their supplies.

15,898. You think there is still a security-a sort of virtual impledgment of the men's wages although they are nominally paid over in cash?-Yes. It may not be by agreement, but the thing practically exists; and I never heard the agents conceal the fact that the profit on the seamen's wages is the main inducement to them in accepting the agency. That very fact, in my opinion, renders the whole transaction irregular and illegal. Of course, that is a matter of opinion.

15,899. Have you had occasion to interfere while seamen were settling wages with the clerk of the agent, in order to prevent part of the money being retained for the payment of the agent's account?-I may mention that the men, after being settled with at the Custom House generally run down to the agent's office. I know that, because I hear the men speaking about it, and the agents, or rather the agents' clerks, telling them to go down to the place.

15,900. Have you frequently heard the men told to go down?- Yes. The men sometimes blurt it out, and the agents' clerks are not very much satisfied at their doing so; but the whole thing is so well understood, that there is little concealment about it.

15,901. You have frequently heard conversations on the subject, showing that the men were expected to go down at once?-Yes; and some of the clerks had the audacity to attempt to deduct the amount at the office not later than last year.

15,902. Who were these? Are they mentioned in your report?- They are mentioned in my report to the Board of Trade.

15,903. Do you know whether one consequence of the new regulations has been, that the green hands engaged for the settling and whaling voyages are much fewer now than they were before 1867?-I am not aware of the fact. My attention has never been called to it.

15,904. Are you prepared to say that there are not fewer green hands engaged now than there were before 1867?-I cannot say as to that.

15,905. Your observation has not led you to think so?-No. The idea never occurred to me.

15,906. Have you had occasion to know whether the seamen have been told by the masters or the agents since 1868 to attend at the Shipping Office within the time required by law?-The special regulations, unfortunately, do not define any time within which they are to attend, and I have no doubt the agents know that fact.

15,907. The three days do not apply under these regulations?- That is a question that I should not like to give an opinion upon.

15,908. The clause about the three days is quoted in the last head of the regulations?-It is quoted there to show what the general law is.

15,909. But you have a doubt in your own mind as to whether it applies here?-I may at once say that these special regulations were a sort of compromise, and I am so far answerable for their being framed, thinking that they would secure the men their wages. My opinion now is, that it would have been better if the Act had been enforced as it originally stood; and I believe the thing will never be on a satisfactory footing as long as agents who are merchants continue to act as agents.

15,910. Is it not a benefit for the young men who are engaged for the Greenland fishery, to be able to get their outfit from the merchants on credit, as they do?-I think the same thing could be secured by other and legitimate means.

15,911. You know that the men get an advance note for the amount of the first month's wages?-Yes; and after these special regulations came into force, Laurenson & Co. were the first who paid the men over the counter in cash.

15,912. You are speaking now of the advances?-Yes, of the advance note. Messrs. Hay latterly did the same; and Mr. Tait, I think, did so this year for the first time. I recollect asking Mr. Laurenson if he sustained any loss by treating the men with confidence and giving them the money, and to the best of my recollection he said he did not.

15,913. But the outfit requires a larger sum than the advance amounts to in any case?-Yes; but allotment notes would meet that. That would give the relatives of the seamen an opportunity of drawing the money in their absence.

15,914. Are these the only means by which you think a young man without an outfit could provide himself with one?-I think any merchant would give the seamen credit, if they were certain that the present agents did not enjoy the monopoly of giving them their supplies. I may further state, that I believe a gentleman intends to a certain extent to act its agent for some of the vessels this year, to pay the men's advances in cash, and to allow their allotment notes to be paid by a banker or some disinterested party. If that system were introduced, it would knock the whole irregularity on the head. Such is my individual opinion.

15,915. Do you think the gentlemen who now act as agents would have any hesitation, or that any danger would arise to them, in supplying goods to the men, if they were not acting as agents, but merely as merchants?-I think they are not entitled to enjoy a monopoly of the trade.

15,916. But supposing they were not acting its agents at all, but merely as merchants, do you think they would hesitate, or that they would incur any risk by advancing outfits to the men its they now do, but without the security or the quasi security which they now possess?-In that case the men's custom would be distributed over all the town. They would give their custom to the merchants they were partial to, instead of being confined to the shop of the agent who engages them, as at present.

[Page 402]

15,917. But would those who got their custom incur any serious risk in giving them their supplies and outfits on credit?-They would be liable to the same risk that every merchant who embarks in trade is subject to. No man can deal with another on credit without being liable to a risk; but at present the merchants practically enjoy a monopoly of the seamen's supplies.

15,918. The seamen, however, could go to any other shop in town for their supplies if they chose?-At present they could, but I have no doubt they would offend the agent by doing so. If they repudiated his right to secure his own account, that would put an end to the thing, because the main inducement for the agents to act as they do is that they have the supplying of the men with goods.

15,919. Have you anything else to say?-Nothing.

Lerwick, January 30, 1872, JOHN WALKER, recalled.

15,920. You formerly gave evidence before the Commissioners under the Act of 1870, in Edinburgh?-I did.

15,921. Are there any points on which you wish to give further information?-I merely wish to reaffirm all that I previously stated. From what the people say, the only thing that seems to require explanation, is with regard to the value of the worsted or wool for the making of a shawl.

15,922. You refer to question 44,290: 'I know for a fact that the worsted of a shawl which sells at about 30s. is worth from 2s. to 3s. They nominally give the worker 9s. for working it, but if they get it in goods that will be about 4s.; and they get from 25s. to 30s. for it?'-Yes. The question was intended to apply to half square shawls and haps selling at from 1 to 30s., according to the verdancy of the animal that was buying it. It takes about sixteen hundreds to make a hap, and the worsted will be worth. from 2d. to 21/2d. It will take from sixteen to seventeen hundreds to make a half square fine shawl, and the worsted of it will be worth about 4d.; and these shawls are sold at from 18s. to 30s., according as customers can be got for them.

15,923. Are haps often sold at so high a price as 30s?-No, not haps; they are sold up to about 1. That has been my experience. I may say that I have been in shops, when the first question asked before a price was stated was, whether the article was for the person's self or for a stranger; that is to say, was it to be sold to a person in the country, or was it to go away outside, because in these cases they have two different prices. I have likewise been in shops when, if there were any of the knitting girls there selling shawls or other articles, the merchant would take very good care to state the price to his other customers in the lowest possible voice, and at the farthest possible distance from these girls; and I have been repeatedly told that they will occasionally put the price upon a piece of paper, so as not to let the knitters hear it. That I say in contradiction to the assertion which is made, that the merchants sell the hosiery articles at the same price as that at which they nominally buy them. Again, I want to point out that in most cases all the worsted that the hosiery merchants in Lerwick dealt in up to the last year was bought from the country merchants for goods, and therefore that even that nominal value did not represent the true value of the articles. I produce an account containing transactions amounting to 146; it is all balanced by goods, which were entirely worsted, up to 1, 3s. 10d. The only item of cash I find in the account is 15s. Lately, however, they have been obliged and are ready to buy the worsted for cash, because they cannot do without it, and the supply of worsted is decreasing.

15,924. You are speaking of Shetland worsted?-Yes. I may mention also that that estimate of the value of the worsted for a shawl was intended by me to embrace the Yorkshire worsted, or what they call the Pyrenees, although I don't suppose either the worsted or the wool ever saw the Pyrenees: it is made in Yorkshire.

15,925. Are you speaking, in both these cases of haps and of shawls, of articles made of Shetland worsted?-All the haps are made from Shetland worsted, the coarser worsted.

15,926. You said in that answer to which you have referred, 'They nominally give the worker 9s. for working it, but if they get it in goods that will be about 4s.:' is not that a little too strong?-I don't think it.

15,927. That assumes that the charge for the goods is about 100 per cent. above the cost price, or rather it assumes that it is 100 per cent. above the price at which the worker of the shawl ought to get these goods, which would not be the cost price, but the retail price?-No, I don't mean that. I mean to say that if these merchants were to go to the proper market, they could buy their goods at such a rate that they would be able to sell them at 100 per cent. profit; but I know that a great many of these merchants go to second-hand houses to buy. Whether it is for the object of getting long credits, or what it is, I don't know; but I know from the parties who come here that a great many of them are not first-class houses.

15,928. Have you any personal knowledge as to the wholesale houses with which these merchants deal for their goods?-Do you mean, do I know who comes down here?

15,929. Yes?-Yes, I do.

15,930. From what source is your knowledge derived?-From their travellers, and from seeing their goods coming down.

15,931. You are acquainted with the travellers of those houses?- Most assuredly.

15,932. And you know that they are not wholesale houses in the strict sense of the term, but middle-men?-Exactly. I say that the merchants here could go to much better quarters for their goods if they were to put their business on a proper footing. Wholesale houses in Aberdeen are not in the same position as wholesale houses in London.

15,933. Do London houses send travellers here?-No; but if the merchants' business was on a proper foundation they could get introductions to these houses, and do their business at a better rate.

15,934. Is there any other point on which you wish to make an addition or explanation upon your former evidence?-It has been generally remarked by fishcurers, that one reason why they could not give up the present system of dealing with their men was because the men would not have the means of getting boats and fittings for the fishing, whilst at the same time the principal fish-curers assert that they do pay enormous sums of money to the men. For instance, I have seen from the papers that it has been stated by Messrs. Hay & Co. that in the island of Whalsay alone they paid 1300 last year, whilst the total value of the boats and fishing gear there cannot be over 400. Therefore it is absurd to say that the men would not be able to supply themselves with boats. Again, it has been stated and maintained that the Shetland men as a race are intelligent, and in one sense they are. Indeed their intelligence is so acute that the employers are ashamed, as I have no doubt you have found in the evidence, to give them accounts. They are rather afraid that their acuteness would discover too much in them, but in addition to that they tell you it would be impossible for the men to divide the produce of the fishing among themselves if it was paid in cash at the station, because it would require a man conversant with accounts; so that it is an absurdity to say that they are an intelligent race, and yet cannot adjust the proportions which would go to the different men in a boat's crew if they were paid in cash.

15,935. Probably they would be sufficiently acute to adjust their accounts if they were accustomed to do so like other people in other parts of the world?-I say they are quite capable of doing that. They are quite capable of looking after their own accounts if these were [Page 403] produced to them. There is another thing I should like to point out with regard to the agriculture of Shetland as compared with that of other places. I am sorry I have come away without the statistics, but if you look into them you will find that we have a much larger number of stock in Shetland with a rental of only 30,000, than Orkney with a rental of 60,000, from which I deduce that it is a far greater object to the merchants and proprietors here to continue the people as fishers upon the present system, than to put the land upon a legitimate and proper footing.

15,936. In what way do you arrive at that inference?-The land is under-rented for the purpose of binding the men to continue as fishermen for their employers. A great deal of the land is in outsets, and these outsets were originally set at the mere interest upon the house that was built, or upon any enclosures that were made. That was done for the purpose of procuring extra fishermen, and the system has been continued to this day. By looking at the valuation roll, you would find an immense difference between the rents of merks land and the rents of outsets.

15,937. I don't suppose that any proprietor who employs his men in fishing would deny that if he ceased to do so the rents of his tenants must be raised?-I rather think they do deny that.

15,938. I have had admissions made to that effect in the evidence which has been given before me?-I have heard none of the evidence that has been taken; but I am glad to hear that they are thinking of turning over a new leaf, and admitting even that they are wrong.

15,939. I don't say it has been a general admission, but that admission has been made by one proprietor at least?-I say that it ought to be a general admission. Another thing I would mention is, that the people with their present beliefs are unfortunately too subservient to come forward and frankly give full evidence upon the matter, and I would give an instance of the sub-serviency and illiterateness that prevails among them. I received the other day a report from two men, in which they use such language as 'resources of science and art,' and one of them was styled the superintendent, and the other the manager, of the working department of the largest establishment in this place for the manufacture of blubber. One of these men could hardly sign his own name, while the other had to sign with cross. That fact I mention in order to show that these men are under the belief that they are bound to do in most cases as their superiors may dictate to them.

15,940. Has it come within your knowledge that many people have been afraid to come forward and give evidence before this Commission?-Yes; a great many people have told me they would not do it.

15,941. Do you refer to fishermen?-To fishermen and to females too. I may mention also that I have been instrumental in starting a large company here upon the limited liability principle, the first object of which is stated to be to afford to the people of Shetland an opportunity of prosecuting their fishings free from the truck system.

15,942. Is that a company for prosecuting the Faroe fishing or the ling fishing?-It is to be for all. It is to commence this year with the Faroe fishing.

15,943. Did you send out any vessels in 1871?-No, we did not begin in 1871, except with a single vessel in which I was interested, and which we sent out to see what we could do with it.

15,944. Did that vessel belong to the company?-No, not to this company. The company has been formed in Glasgow, of gentlemen who are desirous of putting down this iniquitous system.

15,945. Do you propose to carry on the fishing with out any shop?-Yes.

15,946. And to pay all in cash?-Yes.

15,947. Do you propose to pay by annual settlements?-The men still prefer going upon the old system of payments; but in order to provide for their outfit, as they call it, we propose to pay it in cash the moment the vessel leaves the harbour with them on board, and we intend to afford to their families an advance of what is fair and reasonable to keep them while the men are away. We are quite prepared to run all that risk against a bad fishing, and we will pay them the balance in cash at any moment they choose after they come home.

15,948. Are the advances you are to make to be in cash also?- Yes; they are to be in cash, not in goods.

15,949. Do you think it will be possible for the fishing business to be conducted, perhaps not immediately, but shortly after this, without the fishermen requiring advances either in cash or goods?-Certainly; and I say that if that system could be adopted now it could be carried on, looking to the amount of money that has been accumulated on deposit by the people in the country generally.

15,950. Then why do you propose in your enterprise to make advances in cash?-Just to suit the humour of the people, until they come to see for themselves that such advances are not necessary.

15,951. I suppose you want to begin cautiously?-We do, and to work them into the system gradually. In fact we wish them eventually to take shares in these vessels, and to get vessels and boats for themselves.

15,952. But in the arrangement you propose, so far as the Faroe fishing is concerned, the men will be sharesmen?-They are sharesmen in the produce, but they have no shares in the vessel; but I propose that they should eventually have an interest in the vessel, and we are quite willing to give them an interest in any vessel they choose. We are also desirous to get better boats for them in the ling fishing. It has been stated likewise that the people could not get their supplies at the stations if there was a cash system, as there would not be shops there, because the whole amount that is sold at the stations in the course of a year is merely nominal; and to show that, it is mentioned that it is usually an ordinary splitter who attends to the shop, or the fish factor. That man is not in the shop any time during the rest of the year, and it is said that there is only a very limited amount of goods sent there, being intended only for the supply of the men when they go out to sea. If that is the case, it would be no great hardship if these goods were not there, but I say that they would be there.

15,953. Do you think the men could easily take their own supplies with them?-Quite easily; and wherever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered. If there is money to be got there, you will be sure to find shops there too.

15,954. In what way were the men paid who went to the Faroe fishing in your vessel last year?-They were paid by shares the same as they had hitherto been, and this [producing it] is a copy of their settlement. The name of the vessel is the 'Lily of the Valley.'

15,955. I see that this account of the settlement is drawn up in the form which is ordinarily used in Shetland?-I don't know, but I suppose it is.

15,956. It shows the amount of fish caught, and then the deductions, and finally the division?-Yes.

15,957. I see no deduction for commission?-There is no commision.

15,958. That is usually, but not universally, taken by the owner?- I don't know why it should be. I think it is hardly fair if the men are doing their duty that the owner should not do his also, and take the fish to the best market.

15,959. You think the owner should be considered to be paid for that by his share of the produce?-I think so. I also produce a copy of our account for the expense of salt and curing.

15,960. Does this show the actual expenditure incurred by you in curing the fish brought in by the vessel?-Yes.

15,961. Was it arranged with the men that they should be charged only the actual expense incurred for salt and curing, and not an estimate according to the usual system?-Yes.

15,962. Is it not usual in Shetland that the expense of curing is deducted according to an estimate of 47s. 6d. and 50s., or 52s. 6d., as the case may be?-No; I understand it is the cost that is charged. The agreement [Page 404] with our men was that they were to receive one half of the proceeds of the fish caught, after deducting the expenses of curing, salt, etc., and master's premium 10s. per ton, and mate's premium 2s. 6d. per ton, and that they should receive 8 lbs. weight of bread per man per week, and also 9d. per score to each man for all the fish caught by him, one half to be paid by the owners, and the other half by the crew.

15,963. What was the return to the owners upon their share of that vessel last year?-22 per cent.

15,964. The total share payable to each man is shown in the account you have produced?-Yes. Their half share amounted to 188, 9s. 6d., but then they had wages in the succeeding voyage as specified in the agreement.

15,965. Is there any other point on which you wish to make any additional remark?-I may say that when I was south lately, I saw letters from some of the whaling agents here, which plainly indicated that the commission of 21/2 per cent. paid to them for the engagement of seamen for the seal and whale fishing, would not, in their opinion, afford sufficient remuneration to them.

15,966. Have you got these letters?-No; but I saw them, and I was asked by the owners in the south if I could put them in the way of getting an agent who would consider himself sufficiently remunerated by that commission. I was first asked if I considered 21/2 per cent. paid them for their trouble. I said certainly; and I then engaged with Mr. Scott in Lerwick to act as agent for these vessels. Their previous agents did not consider that they would be remunerated sufficiently unless they got a full opportunity of trading with the men.

15,967. Is Mr. Scott to act as agent without having any opportunity of trading with the men?-Yes. The advance will be paid in cash at the time of the engagement, and the allotment notes will be paid at the bank.

15,968. Did you make that arrangement in consequence of what the shipowners in the south said to you?-Yes. That is an experiment which Mr. Scott is about to make; but there is no doubt about the result of it, because 21/2 per cent. is a very liberal commission for doing little or nothing.

15,969. Are you now in the management of the chromate of iron quarries in Unst?-Yes.

15,970. I understand the wages there are not paid in truck?-No; they have not been since I had anything to do with the quarries.

15,971. Are you aware that that was the case formerly-Yes; it was truck from beginning to end.

15,972. Did you find that to be the case when you undertook the management of the quarries?-Yes; after I had commenced the thing I was asked by the man who had previously trucked them if I would allow the workmen to be settled with in the office, so that they could get them into the shop immediately afterwards.

15,973. In what capacity had that person trucked them? Was he secretary or manager for the company?-They had a sort of anomalies there for managing the company. This one was supposed to be paymaster, and then they had a manager. The paymaster was a director, and he had a shop too.

15,974. Did you ascertain that the men had been paid at that shop by lines or tickets?-There was no payment at all. Their accounts were adjusted from time to time, the amount of goods which they had got was taken off, and the balance was handed to them. It was done openly and above-board; the man himself told me about it.

15,975. But accounts are always kept and settled in Shetland without any attempt of concealment?-I think so. I never had any difficulty in discovering it. I may add further, from my experience as chairman of three parochial boards, that since the system of truck and paying with lines was done away with in the parishes I am connected with, the rates have been reduced considerably.

15,976. How do you account for that?-Because the people have got money. It used to be considered an acknowledged fact, that for a pauper's shilling, if they brought a shilling to the shop, they would get 14d. worth of goods. The money was able to go much further, because there was wholesome competition between the different merchants to get a share of the money.

15,977. I understand Major Cameron's tenants throughout Shetland are at liberty to fish for any fish-curer they please?- Yes, for any one they please.

15,978. I think in your previous evidence you referred to the lease to Spence & Co. in Unst, and expressed a sort of regret that it had ended in a monopoly?-Yes.

15,979. There has been a good deal of evidence given before me to the effect that a monopoly of that kind is beneficial, and that it is wholesome, mainly in preventing small shops from springing up in large numbers, and that it requires a large capitalist to develop the resources of the country properly: is that so?-That is perfectly true: but a merchant or any one who says that should recollect that except for the capital of the poor fishermen they could not carry on the business themselves.

15,980. Are you aware whether the fish-merchants generally are men of large capital?-I should say that they cannot be, from this fact, that they would readily pay the men in cash which they get, and which in the month of August must amount to about 40,000 due to the men, if they had it.

15,981. Is that merely an inference which you draw from the practice which prevails?-Yes.

15,982. But have you any personal knowledge on the subject?- Yes. Perhaps it would not be fair to mention the names of the firms, but I know several firms who have commenced within the last few years with no capital, and who are carrying on a business which in the south would require an enormous capital. I know it is alleged by merchants generally that they do not consider they are trading upon the poor man's capital.

15,983. I suppose you speak of the merchants trading upon the poor man's capital, in this sense, that they do not pay for the fish which is in their hands until about the time when they get their returns?-Exactly; that they neither are merchants nor agents. They are not merchants, because they do not pay the men for the raw material, and they are not agents, because they do not give them honestly their account sales.

15,984. Are you aware of the practice existing in Shetland, that the proprietors in many cases receive their rents from the fish-curers?-Yes. During the first year or two that I settled for Major Cameron, I got many cheques from the fish-curers.

15,985. Was that for the whole amount of rent due by a number of fishermen?-Yes, either that, or each man would bring his separate cheque; but in a great many cases in Shetland the fish-curer just pays it slump, or what is called guarantees it.

15,986. That is not an actual guarantee; it is merely an arrangement by which the fisherman, for the convenience of all parties, is debited in the fish-curer's book with the amount of rent which the fish-curer pays to the landlord?- True; but in it great many cases, as I have previously stated, I think there is a chronic balance against the men, which balance, I think, if looked into, would generally be found to be composed to a great extent of advances of rent for the next year, which practically thirls the men on to them, but which has no right to go through their books at all.

15,987. Are you aware whether the fish-curer is induced to make that advance of rent by the consideration that he holds his own premises from the landlord, and might be charged a higher rent, or lose some other advantage, if he did not do so?-Most assuredly. There is no doubt that, if they were thrown open, the rents of the business premises would double themselves throughout the country.

15,988. Have you known any instance in which the landlord favoured the merchant so far as to refuse to allow other businesses to be begun upon his estates?-Yes.

15,989. Had that happened in the case of Major Cameron's estates?-Not so far as I know, and no one [Page 405] has ever asked it. In fact we have business premises lying unlet just now.

15,990. Do you know that that has happened elsewhere?-I do; in more cases than one.

15,991. Is it not virtually the case in Unst, that no premises are allowed there except those of Spence Co.?-I don't know about that, because Spence & Co.'s principal premises are upon Henderson's property.

15,992. Were you not aware of Spence & Co. removing a merchant who had premises on the property of Major Cameron, which was under tack to them?-No; I think that was on a neighbouring property.

15,993. Was that the case of a house that was shifted bodily across the road?-It was not shifted bodily. The man put up a new place altogether.

15,994. Was that on Major Cameron's property?-No; neither in the one case nor in the other. I think he came off the Greenfield property, and he built a place upon the Earl of Zetland's lands.

15,995. Was there no one removed from Major Cameron's property in the neighbourhood of Uyea Sound, by Spence & Co.?-I don't think there was. There was a man there with a lease of land who kicked up a row with us about a pier and other things of kind, whose nephew, under his name was keeping a shop, and we distinctly told him that he must turn his attention to something else; that if he would use the house for a lodging-house or something of that kind he could stay, but that we would not allow him to do it under these circumstances.

15,996. Did he put up a shop elsewhere?-Yes. They built a new place to the west of Baltasound.

15,997. What were their names?-Isbister. If I am not misinformed, I think these parties are still carrying on the shop at Uyea Sound, conducted by a man Donald Johnston; at least I saw a boatload of goods coming ashore there, and on inquiry I was told they were for Isbister's shop.

15,998. Do you think such an arrangement as you have made with Spence & Co. is in any sense different as respects the interest of the men from that by which a proprietor cures himself, and employs his own tenants in the fishing?-In the way it is carried out, I don't think there is very much difference; but had it been carried out in the way that was intended and promised, it would have been very different. You must bear in mind that I don't think it is for the interests of the working people in Shetland to have scattald, and therefore it was intended that each man should have a farm for himself, and a lease of it, and they have a right to that under the lease to Spence & Co. Had they stuck to that, or were they to stick to that, they would be quite independent; but as they persist in believing that the scattalds are for their benefit, and as Spence & Co. have a right to these scattalds, it practically binds them to the merchants.

15,999. I understand that Spence & Co, from their lease, have absolute power to remove tenants if they don't comply with the rules and regulations which, are appended to the lease?-I don't think so, not without our sanction. I know that we don't think so.

16,000. That, if it is so, would give them an absolute power to compel the men to fish for them, just as much as when a landlord intimates to his tenants that they must fish for his tacksman on pain of removal. Assuming that they have that power, is not that the effect of it?-Assuming that they have that power, that would be the effect of it, but I don't think they have that power. It was never intended that they should have it, and I don't think they have it. I hold that we alone have power to turn off the tenants, and under the lease we only have power to bring in tenants.

16,001. The effect of the lease and the regulations appended to it, so far as I have been able to examine it, appears to be, that if a sub-tenant fails to comply with the rules and regulations appended to the lease, he may be removed by the lessee?-No, we quite deny that.

16,002. How do you reserve power under the lease to deal with the sub-tenant who does not comply with the rules?-We exclude assignees and sub-tenants, except as after-mentioned.

16,003. Perhaps the shortest way of dealing with that matter will be, that I should have an opportunity of reading the lease or it copy of it at leisure?-Certainly, but I may say decidedly that it was not intended that Spence & Co. should have such a power, and it is not being acted on, because we are now in process of warning four or five tenants who will not come under the rules. It was intended distinctly that we reserved all our present tenants, irrespective of Spence & Co. altogether.

16,004. But are not the powers with which Spence & Co. are invested with regard to peats and other matters, really such as to compel the tenants to remove if they do not comply with the rules?-No. The peats are reserved in our hands, for the purpose of compelling them to take care of the peat-banks.

16,005. That is not Mr. Sandison's reading of the lease?-I cannot help Mr. Sandison's reading of it but I am certain that it is the correct reading, from the fact that there was a very considerable correspondence carried on about Spence & Co. being allowed to put in certain tenants during the first two or three years of their lease. They have only right to put in new tenants within a certain time and after that they have no right to put anybody into a vacant farm.

16,006. You were speaking of poor-rates: do you think there has been no reduction of poor-rates in Shetland from any other cause than the reduction of truck?-Not in my opinion.

16,007. Have there not been better crops and better seasons lately?-Yes, but that does not reduce the number of paupers. The number of paupers has been increased rather than reduced.

16,008. But if there are good seasons with regard to crops and fishings, may not a greater number of paupers be maintained by their own friends, and fewer people fall upon the rates?-That might be so; but if the same number of paupers are on the roll, and if the allowances are practically the same, it must follow that the rates should be stationary.

16,009. Your statement is that the number of paupers has not been reduced?-It has not been reduced. It has been rather increased. I may mention that in Unst there has been a decrease from deaths, but not anything to account for a reduction of the rates from 8s. to 2s. 6d.

16,010. With regard to the price of shawls, when you spoke of a shawl being worth 25s. or 30s., did that apply to the merchants who purchase shawls for goods, or to private dealers?-I referred to what the shawls would be sold for to private individuals in the town.

16,011. The prices which you name for shawls are not the prices that were paid by merchants?-No; but with regard to that I may mention that I have heard merchants from the south say that when they sold goods to merchants here, in a great many cases they got goods back. There is a man named Saint in Aberdeen who deals considerably with the merchants here, and perhaps he would be able to give evidence as to whether he does not prefer to pay in cash, but that to give goods is insisted upon by the merchants here.

16,012. Did you mean to say in an earlier part of your evidence that the merchants here get supplies of goods mostly from second-hand houses?-I mean to say that they could get them from better houses if they chose.

16,013. Would you say that J. & R. Morley & Co.; Copestake, Moore, & Co.; Stewart & M'Donald, Glasgow; Fletcher & Sons, Manchester; J. & W. Campbell, Glasgow; Arthur & Co., Glasgow; Mann, Byars, & Co. Glasgow; George Peek, Manchester, Vesey & Sons, London; Allan & French, London, were second-class houses?-No; but I should like to know the extent of business which the merchants here do with them, and whether they deal wholesale with them or not.

16,014. Would you be surprised to hear that Shetland merchants engaged in the hosiery trade obtain the bulk of their goods from such houses as these?-I should say that perhaps that was the truth, but I should like to know the whole truth about the matter, because [Page 406] these houses, large as they may be, have certain clearances occasionally, which it may suit a people such as those of Shetland to take. I know at least one instance of a large quantity of that class of goods coming down in the steamer, and being damaged by a cask of porter being burst upon them, and a claim was made upon the Leith and Clyde Shipping Co. for something like 50 per cent. of profit, because it was a job lot which had been bought from big houses of that kind.

16,015. But I suppose there are job lots bought by almost every house at times?-Yes, but that has been the system here; in fact it has been stated by people in these big businesses, that they did get rid of their over-season's goods in that way.

16,016. I suppose over-season's goods come to all parts of the rural districts of Scotland?-I am not aware of that, but they may do so.

16,017. Is there anything else you wish to say?-Nothing that I am aware of.

Lerwick, January 30, 1872, CHARLES OLLASON, examined.

16,018. You are a member of the firm of Charles Ollason & Son, bootmakers, Lerwick?-Yes.

16,019. Did you receive that letter [showing] from Mr. Williamson?-Yes. [The following letter was put in:-] 'Haggersta, Jan. 20th 71.' 'Messrs. Charles Ollason & Son. 'Dear Sirs,-I am sorry to say that by some misunderstanding I did not get the wages that I expected to get; for instead of a 3/4th I only got a 1/2 share, and therefore instead of 18 I only got 12. I was due Mr. Stove 4 from the year that I was at the fishing from him, and he handed in that bill against me to Mr. Irvine, who retained that for him, so in that way I had nothing to get at all. Therefore I am sorry to say that I cannot pay the 15s. that I am due you for the boots that I got in August, and I beg that you will wait till the turn of the season, and then I hope that I will be able to pay you, for I am signed to go in the 'Olive' as a sharesman. If you cannot wait till then, you will be so good as to let me know. You will make out a bill, and I will sign it and hand it in to Mr. Irvine, and let it be marked against me, and then you will be sure of your money then-for it is entirely out of my power to pay you any other way just now. I beg that you will comply with my request, as I can't do better.-Your humble Debtor,

'M. Williamson, 'Haggersta, 'Whiteness.'

16,020. Was that letter written to you by him in answer to a demand for payment of your account?-Yes.

16,021. Were you surprised to get a letter of that kind explaining the reasons why your account was not paid?-We were not very much surprised, for we believed the facts to be just as he stated them.

16,022. Did you think it a reasonable enough explanation he was not able to pay you?-Yes; it was reasonable enough for him.

Lerwick, January 30, 1872, JOHN WALKER, recalled.

16,023. I now show you Messrs. Hay & Co.'s store ledger, kept by William Halcrow, their storekeeper here: was Halcrow the party referred to in the report which you mentioned in your evidence?- If Messrs. Hay & Co. say he is their superintendent, he is the same individual.

16,024. Is Messrs. Hay & Co.'s the largest establishment of that kind in Lerwick?-I understand so.

16,025. And the party mentioned in the report describes himself as superintendent of the largest establishment in this place?-Yes, general superintendent, and the other is described as the manager of the working department. The general superintendent is the one who signs his name, and the other is the one who signs with a cross, and they are the parties who speak about the resources of science and art.

16,026. Is the book I now show you kept in a fair enough mercantile hand?-Fair enough.

16,027. Would, you be surprised to hear that it was kept by William Halcrow?-I would not. The reason why I mentioned this matter at all was to show the subserviency of the people in Shetland,-that they are accustomed to do what they are bidden,- that they are ready to sign their names to what they really cannot understand, if they think it is doing a favour to any one above them.

16,028. Do you think Halcrow was incapable of understanding such a phrase as the resources of science and art?-I think so, as it is applied here; because I may mention that in the correspondence which passed before, and which refers to the same parties, they said they did not know that whales had skins.

Lerwick, January 30, 1872, ARTHUR LAURENSON, recalled.

16,029. I understand you have heard the evidence which has been given by Mr. Walker with regard to the merchants in Lerwick, and that you wish to make some explanation in regard to it?-I have not heard it, but the substance of it has been reported to me since I entered the room. I have been told that he said that the merchants in Lerwick buy from second-class houses, and pay for their goods by consignments of hosiery. I wish to refute that, so far as I am concerned; and I refer to Messrs. J. & W. Campbell, Glasgow; Stewart & M'Donald, Glasgow; Arthur & Co., Glasgow; John Clapperton & Co., Glasgow, and Geo. Peek & Co., Manchester, as a proof that I deal with first-class houses.

16,030. Are these the only houses with which you deal?-No; I deal with a good many more.

16,031. Are there any houses from which you get portions of your goods which might be characterized as second-class houses?-No.

16,032. Is it the case that you ever get job lots or over-seasons goods?-Never, unless in the ordinary way of trade. Perhaps an article may be shown to me by a traveller occasionally, but only one pattern out of fifty which may be described as a job lot.

16,033. You do not get in a larger proportion of these goods than other dealers in other country towns?-No; I never bought a job lot altogether in my life. We never pay by consignments of hosiery.

16,034. Is there anything further you wish to state?-At the close of my last examination I wished to make objection to the credibility of a witness. I was asked to state it privately, and I now hand in paper with regard to it. [Produces paper.]

Lerwick, January 30, 1872, ROBERT SINCLAIR, recalled.

16,035. Do you wish to concur with Mr. Laurenson in the statement which he has now made?-Yes. The only difference is that I deal with more houses in London.

16,036. The list of houses which I read from in putting a question to Mr. Walker was furnished by you?-Yes; but it does not include one half of the houses that I deal with. I wish also to say that I have now been 25 years in business, and I never to this day exchanged 2d. worth of hosiery goods for goods in the [Page 407] south. I do not mean to say that I have not bought hosiery goods for goods here, but I have never exchanged them in the south for other goods.*

16,037. Does any one present wish to give any further evidence?- [No answer.] Then I adjourn this inquiry. I have to think the Commissioners of Supply for the use of this room, which they have kindly furnished to me; and I have also to return my thanks to all parties in Shetland with whom I have met, for the courtesy which I have received from them, and for the readiness which they have shown in furnishing me with all information which I required.

*Mr. Linklater also, on the same day, sent the following letter to the Commissioner, referring to the same subject:-

LERWICK, 31st January 1872. W. GUTHRIE, Esq.

Sir,-I am sorry that I was absent when Mr. Walker in his evidence before you today stated, as I have been told, that the merchants here bartered their goods in exchange for drapery goods from second-class warehouses in the south. I beg to state that I have been thirty-seven years in business here, and have paid cash for all the goods ever I bought, and beg to refer you to the following houses from whom I get my goods.-I am, sir, yours very respectfully,

ROBERT LINKLATER.

J. & W. Campbell & Co., Glasgow; Stewart & M'Donald, Glasgow; Arthur & Co., Glasgow; Anderson & Co., Glasgow; J. Clapperton & Co., Glasgow; Chamberlain & Birrell, Glasgow; John Howell & Co., St. Paul s, London; Fandel, Phillips, & Co., Newgate Street, London; Hutton & Co., Newgate Street, London; D. Hyam, Houndsditch, London; Copestake, Moore, & Co., London; George Peek & Co, Manchester; Hall, Russell, & Co., Bradford.

LERWICK: MONDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1872

-MR GUTHRIE.

.-As I have been detained here longer than I expected, owing to the state of the weather, I have held this sitting to-day in order to examine some witnesses who were formerly suggested to me by gentlemen in Lerwick, and whom I was not able to call before closing the previous sittings, and also some others who I think may be useful in supplementing the evidence already taken.

Lerwick, February 5, 1872, Mrs. JOAN WINWICK or FORDYCE, examined.

16,038. Do you live in Chromate Lane, Lerwick?-Yes.

16,039. Is your husband alive?-Yes. He is a pensioner. He was a carpenter to trade, but he does nothing now.

16,040. Do you knit worsted work?-Yes, I knit, but for myself only. I knit with my own wool, and sell the goods.

16,041. Have you never knitted with merchants' wool?-No.

16,042. To whom do you generally sell your hosiery?-I always sold it to Mr. Robert Sinclair since he became a merchant. I always knit haps or coarse shawls.

16,043. What do you pay for the worsted which you use in knitting?-When I buy the worsted it is 2d. per hundred; but when I buy the wool and spin it myself, it comes to be a great deal dearer. We cannot get proper worsted to buy, and we have to manufacture it with our own hands.

16,044. Is the worsted which you buy at 2d. per hundred the kind which you use for a hap of ordinary quality?-Yes.

16,045. At what price do you sell a hap two yards in size made of that worsted?-Perhaps about 10s.

16,046. Have you any of these haps in hand just now?-No.

16,047. Have you sold any lately?-No; I have not sold any this winter. I have not been knitting this winter to sell. I have just been doing things for my own family.

16,048. What else have you knitted besides haps?-I have knitted nothing but haps for a good while. Since I could not see to do finer work I have been spinning worsted and making frocks for my husband, and stockings and things of that sort.

16,049. Where do you buy your worsted?-I have not bought any worsted for a long time. I always bought the wool and spun it myself, because I could not get the worsted to buy.

16,050. Where did you buy your wool?-I buy skins from the women who sell the sheep, and get the wool ru'ed off the sheep when they are killed.

16,051. Are there women who go about and sell wool in that way?-They sell mutton, but they will sell wool to us when we go to their houses and ask them for it.

16,052. Do these women buy the whole sheep?-Yes, they buy them alive; and when they have killed them, they sell the mutton to any person in the town who will buy it.

16,053. Are there many such women?-I suppose there are a few, but I cannot say how many.

16,054. Is that the way in which many people get their supply of wool for spinning?-I think it is, because we cannot get wool in any other way.

16,055. How much wool do you buy at a time?-I have bought 10s. or 12s. worth at a time,-just the skin as I could get it.

16,056. How much do you think you pay for the wool per lb. in that way?-I have seen it cost me 2s. and 16d. and 18d.; but it has been higher of late since the wool became so dear.

16,057. Is not that a very high price for it?-Yes.

16,058. Is it not more commonly about 1s. per lb.?-Yes. When I came to Lerwick it was 1s., 8d., and 6d.

16,059. Is it not still to be got at 1s. per lb.?-Perhaps it may be in country places, where they have plenty of it; but I cannot get it for 1s. unless it is very coarse, and a great deal of refuse in it.

16,060. How much wool does it take to make a hap two yards square?-About 2 lbs. That would be 16 hundreds or cuts.

16,061. Are you speaking all this time of a hap of the ordinary quality?-Yes, the ordinary quality.

16,062. Do you know what a woman gets for knitting a hap of that kind when it is given out?-I cannot say exactly; but I think they give some knitters for plain work only 2d. per hundred, or perhaps a little more. That is what they say they get for knitting plain work.

16,063. Do they count the payment of the knitting by hundreds?-I suppose some of them do, but I have never put out any to knit myself, or taken any in to knit.

16,064. Then for a hap like that, if there were 16 hundreds in it, the knitter would get only 2s. 8d. for the knitting?-Yes; but I think that for knitting borders they get a little more. It is for plain frocks that they say they get 2d. per hundred.

16,065. Are you always paid in goods for your work?-Mr. Sinclair always gave me what I asked. When I asked a little money I got it, and when I required goods for my family, such as soap, soda, or tea, I got them too.

16,066. But I suppose it was understood that you were to be paid in goods?-Yes, that was the custom of the place; but he always trusted me with anything I wanted, if I happened to be due him something at times.

[Page 408]

Lerwick, February 5, 1872, Mrs. ROSINA DUNCAN or SMITH, examined.

16,067. Do you live in Lerwick?-Yes.

16,068. Is your husband alive?-Yes. He is turning an old man now, but he was at the sea at one time.

16,069. Has he got a pension?-No.

16,070. Do you employ yourself in knitting?-I knit a little for my own family.

16,071. Have you given up knitting for other people-Yes.

16,072. Did you knit for Mr. Sinclair at one time?-I sold him a few haps last year.

16,073. Did you sell him a great number before that-I did not; but when I had any little things I sold them to Mr. Joseph Leask, and got money articles for them.

16,074. Did you ever sell so many as half a dozen to Sinclair?-I cannot say, for I did not count them. The last one I sold was to him.

16,075. What did you get for it?-12s.

16,076. How much wool was in it?-I cannot say, for I spun it myself, and wrought it until it was done.

16,077. Do you not know how many cuts of worsted were in it?- No; I did not count them.

16,078. What was the size of it?-I suppose it would be about two yards.

16,079. Was it made of fine wool or ordinary wool?-It was just the ordinary wool that is used for haps.

16,080. Were you paid in money or in goods for it?-I was paid mostly in goods, but he gave me money without my asking for it.

16,081. How much money did you get?-1s. or so. I could not exactly say how much, but he gave me what I required. I got the goods which I required, and he gave me that money, and he also gave me tea, which was the same as money, because if I had had to buy it I would have had to pay for it.

16,082. Could you get money for the tea?-I did not sell it; I kept it for my own use.

16,083. Did you ever sell anything that you got for hosiery?-No. I always required anything I got for my own family.

Lerwick, February 5, 1872, GRACE SLATER, examined.

16,084. Are you a knitter in Lerwick?-Yes.

16,085. Do you do anything else?-I keep lodgers. They are generally workmen, such as masons.

16,086. Do you knit a good deal?-No; all that I do in that way is very trifling. It is generally fine veils that I knit.

16,087. Who do you sell them to?-Mr. Sinclair; I work for him; he gives me the worsted. It is Scotch worsted that I get, but I don't know the quality of it, nor the price.