U
the
169
FORM 7.
Order by the Governor under the provisions of the Deportation Ordinance, 1912.
Council Chamber, Victoria, in the Colony of Hongkong,
day of
191
•
Whereas it is deemed desirable by the Governor-in- Council that
should be prohibited under the provisions of the Deportation Ordinance, 1912, from resid- ing or being within the Colony for the space of years from the date thereof upon the grounds hereinafter appearing :
The Governor-in-Council doth hereby by virtue of the said Ordinance order that the above named person be prohibited and the said person is hereby prohibited from residing or being in the Colony for the space of time afore- said from the said date, and that the period of
days from the said date be fixed as the time within which the said person shall depart from the Colony aforesaid.
Statement of the grounds upon which this order is made :-
That the said person
Clerk of Councils.
Objects and Reasons.
Clause 3 of the Bill is new and is intended to enable any person whose banishment is under consideration to state his own case against banishment and will enable the Governor- in-Council to check the charges and pursue his enquiries with greater certainty of giving a just decision than seems possible under the existing law. The fact that the person questioned is under lawful arrest and in the House of De- tention and that no caution is administered will it is thought safeguard his interests by preventing the use against him of his answers in other proceedings (R. v. Gavin 15 cox 336, R. v, Male 17 cox 689; R. v. Histed 19 cox 16; R. v. Best 1909, 1 K.B. 692); but to remove all doubts on the point a sub-section to that effect is added to clause 12.
Clause 4 is based on section 4 (1) of Ordinance No. I of 1882, the first two sub-sections of Clause 5 are based on section 13 of Ordinance No. 10 of 1886 and the last sub- section of that clause carries out the evident intention of Article III of the China and Corea (Amendment) Order in Council 1910. Although as a general rule natural born British subjects are outside the scope of any banishment Ordinance, it is mainfestly unjust that when prisoners have been convicted by the consular courts of crimes committed in China and have been sent as a matter of convenience to serve their terms of imprisonment in the Gaol of the Colony, that this Colony should be unable to get rid of them again on their release.
Clause 6 is based on section 4 (1) and (2) of Ordinance No. 1 of 1882, Clause 7 on section 4 (3), Clause 8 on sec- tion 5, Clause 9 on section 8 and Clause 10 ou section 10 thereof. The increase in the amount of the sentence has been sanctioned by H.M. Secretary of State in a despatch dated the 30th June, 1911. The provisions of Clauses 11 and 12 providing for the automatic banishment of Straits deportees have been likewise sanctioned. It will have been noticed that certain sections of Ordinance No. 1 of 1882 have not been re-enacted although by Clause 13 the whole of that Ordinance is repealed. The reason is that section 3 is seldom acted on and is deemed unnecessary, and that sections 6, 7 and 9 cannot be re-enacted as they are con- trary to the express proviso to Article XIV of the Letters Patent of the 19th January, 1888, which prevents the Governor, (except where the offence has been of a political nature unaccompanied by any other grave crime), from making it a condition of any pardon or remission that the offender shall be banished. The remaining enactments repealed by Clause 13 are now rendered unnecessary as the powers conferred by this consolidating Bill cover, the cases they were designed to meet.
C. G. ALABASTER, Attorney General,