It is unnecessary to refer in detail to mere admissions on the part of landlords and tacksmen, that such obligations exist on the estates under their control. Such admissions were made in all the cases already referred to, as will be seen from the references on the margin. In some cases, however, arguments were stated in justification of the practice. Mr. Irvine perhaps put the case lower than any of this class of witnesses for he simply said in regard to Burra, that the tack had been held for a very long time by his firm, and that when it expired many of the people owed debts, some of which would [Page 11 rpt.] not have been recovered if the island had passed to another fish-merchant as tacksman. He assumed that here, as in other cases, the landlord in Shetland must depend on the fishing for payment of his rents. Mr. Bruce, younger, of Sumburgh thus states his views:- 'The tenants on the property in this parish managed by me are at liberty to go to sea to the Greenland or Faroe fishing, or to pursue any land occupation as they please; but if they remain at home and go to the home fishing, they are expected to deliver their fish to me, and receive for it the full market value. This is one of the conditions on which they hold their farms, and is, I consider, a beneficial rule for the fishermen. They must fish to some merchant, and as I give them as high a price as they could get from another, they are no losers, while I provide suitable curing and fishing stations, and these stations of mine are the most convenient places for them to deliver their fish .... This, I will endeavour to show, is no grievance at all, but an advantage to the fishermen.' 'In looking over the whole of Shetland, it will be found that the most prosperous districts are those under the direct management of the landlords.' 'Many of the fishermen in this country (as, indeed, many of the poorer classes everywhere) are unable, from want of thrift and care, to manage their own matters in a satisfactory manner, and require to be thought for and acted for, and generally treated like children, and are much better off under the management of a landlord who has an interest in their welfare, than they would be if in the hands of a merchant whose only object was to make a profit out of them.' 'A merchant who has no control over the fishermen, may, in some cases, wish to get them and keep them in his debt, in order to secure their custom; but the case of a landlord also a merchant is quite different. It is his interest to have a prosperous, thrifty, and independent tenantry; and he will use his utmost endeavour to keep them out of debt, and to encourage saving habits.' 'I can see no reason why the fact of a man being a landlord should prevent him from being also a merchant and fish-curer; and if so, why he should not secure a lot of good fishermen by making it one of the conditions of occupancy by his tenants, that if fishermen they shall fish to him.'