THE HONGKONG GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 11TH JULY, 1896.
GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION.-No. 252.
625
The following Report of the Committee appointed to enquire into the Question of Flogging in Victoria Gaol, which was laid before the Legislative Council on the 8th instant, is published.
By Command,
Colonial Secretary's Office, Hongkong, 9th July, 1896.
J. H. STEWART LOCKHART,
Colonial Secretary.
HONGKONG, 8th July, 1896.
SIR,
The undersigned, who were appointed a Committee to inquire into flogging at Victoria Gaol, have the honour to present the subjoined report.
2. The scope of the Committee was to inquire generally into the manner in which floggings are administered in the Gaol and especially as regards the cases of two prisoners No. 528 and No. 704, and further to offer any suggestions concerning the modification or improvement of the system of flogging at present in force in the Gaol.
3. The Committee met on ten occasions, and examined the following witnesses whose evidence is appended, viz. :—
LAU KAU, Mr. CRAIG,
•
....late prisoner No. 528;
..Chief Warden;
Dr. MARQUES, .........late Gaol Surgeon;
Dr. BELL,
...Assistant Surgeon in charge of Gaol;
Mr. WILKINSON, ..........Gaol Hospital Warder;
Mr. NOLAN,
Mr. THOMSON,
....Head Turnkey;
...late Acting Superintendent of Gaol ;
Mr. LETHBRIDGE, .........Superintendent of Gaol;
Dr. AYRES,
....Colonial Surgeon.
4. It will be convenient to divide the report into separate portions dealing with the following matters:
1. The Rules under which floggings an 1 other punishments may be imposed. II. The cases of prisoners No. 528 and No. 704.
III. The general question of flogging.
IV. Suggestions and observations.
RULES.
3. (i) The Rules dealing with Prison Offences and Punishments are Rules 266 to
་
279 inclusive published in the Government Gazette of 31st October, 1891. (ii) After a careful perusal of these rules and after a close examination of Messrs. THOMSON and LETHBRIDGE, the Committee are of opinion that these rules are not so expressed as to be easy of construction.
(iii) The inquiry reveals that both the Superintendents who have been examined have put a broad construction upon the words "any act of insubordi- "nation requiring to be suppressed by extraordinary means" which occur in Rule 274; and the Committee are not prepared to say that such a construction is unwarranted.
(iv) It appears that it has been usual to construe the words just quoted as vesting the Superintendent with the powers of ordering a flogging for repeated refusal to labour. Whether this construction is right or wrong depends entirely on the construction to be placed upon the wording of Rule 272, which--so far as is necessary for the present purpose--reads thus: The Superintendent may deprive any prisoner of his evening "meal for persistent and aggravated idleness, or refusal to labour."
The Honourable
66
J. H. STEWART LOCKHART,
Colonial Secretary,
&c.
Fc.,
$c.