Present: The Rev. William REES, Robert COWEN, Esq., George HEAD, Esq., Thomas BARNES, Esq., M. D., and James FARISH, Esq.

Last week we reported a number of poaching cases by which the Carlisle District Angling Association secured convictions to the amount of Ł35. To-day more persons were brought up charged with a similar offence in the Solway, namely, fishing with nets of mesh of which was less than one inch and three quarters from knot to knot and seven inches round. If the Angling Association continue their laudable efforts, they will soon put an end to all poaching.

Mr. WANNOP, solicitor appeared for the Association in the following cases:

James BEWLEY, of Skinburness, fisherman, was charged with fishing with an illegal net, which was produced. The defendant is one of the persons who was convicted last Saturday.

Edward ATKINSON, of Cargo, one of the Association’s watchers deposed that on Tuesday last when he went down to the Solway he found BEWLEY’s net “mounted up again.” It was regularly set, and in the same place as before. He went down again on Thursday and cut it away.

The Clerk: Did you speak to him about it?

Witness: No, sir.

The Clerk: Then how do you know it is his?

Witness: I saw him setting it.

Defendant: Never.

Mr. REES: What have you to say to this charge?

Defendant: I never mended my net. It was not set. He is mistaken.

Mr. REES: Was the net taken up as he says?

Witness: No, sir; it was regularly set.

By Mr. WANNOP : A day or two before the last offence I cut a bit out of the trap. This was mended on Tuesday. The trap was illegal altogether.

Mr. COWEN: How do you explain the trap?

Witness: There are certain places where the fish enter and pass along the net, and as soon as they get into the trap they can’t get out of it again.

Mr. WANNOP: BEWLEY was up before for having his net in the Firth out of season.

Mr. REES: Yes; and he was convicted last week for fishing with this very net.

Defendant: It is quite a mistake to say that I mended my net. I did not do so.

Mr. WANNOP: But the offence is for allowing the net to remain n the water.

Mr. REES: I am not quite sure of that. It seems to me to have been the duty of the watchers to have destroyed the net last week.

Defendant: When I was last here I asked a gentleman what was to be done with the net, but I could get no information from him.

BOWMAN, the other watcher, deposed that when he was down with ATKINSON on a previous occasion he cut away a portion of the trap of BEWLEY’s net. On Tuesday he observed that it had been mended.

The Clerk remarked that if one portion of the net was illegal, it was all illegal, and ought therefore to have been destroyed.

Mr. REES said in this case the bench considered the law had not been complied with sufficiently - the net having been left standing on the first occasion - to justify a second conviction.

Mr. FARISH added that it was ATKINSON’s business, and the business of any other watcher, to seize the nets and bring them before the court, in order that they might be destroyed; no person but the Magistrates, upon conviction, had authority to destroy them. He understood the Court considered that the cutting up of the net on Tuesday was merely a carrying out of the order of last Saturday.

John TINDALL, fisherman, parish of Holm Cultram, was charged a similar offence, on the 21st inst.

The defendant said that ATKINSON had the measure of his net. It was not seven inches round now, but the water had caused it to run in. It was made seven inches round.

ATKINSON: His net was 120 yards long. The trap is small in the mesh.

Mr. REES: Is the protion produced the whole of it?

ATKINSON: No, sir, only part.

The Clerk: You ought to bring the whole away.

Mr. REES: (to defendant): How long have you been a fisher?

Defendant: 10 or 11 years.

Mr. REES: The how long have you had the net?

Defendant: It was knitten this season.

Mr. COWEN: You have been a fisher, ATKINSON: Would that net run up?

ATKINSON: Yes, sir, a little. The practice is, to make a small piece first, in order to see how much it does run up; and then to make the net.

Mr. REES: We must convict in the sum of Ł5, but the expenses shall be taken out of the penalty.

James FERGUSON was next called upon.

Bystander: I have his Ł5, (laughter.)

Mr. WANNOP: I may as well state that GASH’s net was 570 yards long.

William WILLIS, also of the parish of Holm Cultram, was charged with the same offence.

Defendant: We are getting the nets out as fast as we can.

Mr. REES: They must be destroyed.

WILLIS: Won’t ye let us catch a few flounders with them?

Mr. REES: We can’t allow anything of the kind. We must enforce the law.

The Bench then convicted the other defendants, and ordered all the nets to be destroyed.

Mr. WANNOP: Will you allow ATKINSON his expenses for going down there?

Mr. REES: No; he is paid by the Association, and receives one half of the penalty as informer. We can’t allow anything as a witness.

Mr. WANNOP: Then I suppose you will allow the other watcher; he is a witness, and receives no part of the penalty.

Mr. REES: Yes; he will be allowed as a witness.

All penalties were paid.