THE HONGKONG GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 23RD NOVEMBER, 1878.
569
I have thus referred to the extraneous subjects touched upon by my Honourable friend; the real subject we were called to discuss--the despatch of Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH on the enlargement of the prison-I leave to Honourable members to debate. As I told you at the last meeting, my duty is to hear what you have to say on that subject, and I will give every attention to what you do say. My Honourable friend has studied with great care all the facts and figures it was his duty to study, but there was one point I must say I should have been glad if he had avoided. I took it to be somewhat of a reflection on Mr. CREAgh.
Honourable W. KESWICK.-Not a reflection.
His EXCELLENCY.-I may be wrong, but so I took it to be. I find what the Police Magistrate did was this. That on receiving from certain Visiting Justices an application to take the chair at a meeting to discuss the enlargement of the Gaol he obtained the opinion of the Attorney General, and the Attorney General expressed the opinion that under clause X of the Ordinance he had no power to summon a meeting for that object. Well, I may here remind my Honourable friend that before the date of that letter, signed by himself, by my Honourable friend here on the left (Mr. Lowcock) and by other gentlemen-long before that I had laid before you the despatch of Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH, and, in other words, it became a question for the legislature to consider. Now what is the use of a legislature? Why are we here at all if, when a despatch from the Secretary of State is laid upon the table, to be discussed here, my Honourable friends write to the Police Magistrate to have a meeting of Visiting Justices convened to discuss the very matter which we are to-day discussing? Surely this is the place for such things. I could well understand it if the Visiting Justices could say, this matter has been neglected for years by the Governor and Council, but they could not say that, but the first part of their request has been complied with. The Governor in Council not only made alterations immediately before my arrival, but I myself, on the suggestion of the Chief Justice that it would be a very good thing for us to have a Committee of this Council to consider the rules and regulations of the Gaol, had said that that should be done. As it was to be done by a Committee here I have no hesitation in telling my two Honourable friends it would have been better for them to have taken their position as members of the Council, to have paid some attention to the opinion of the Governor and the Chief Justice, that this was a matter to be considered by a Committee of the Council. In a Crown Colony it is. important to avoid meetings, except such as are strictly legal and in accord with the constitutions. I quite agree with Mr. CREAGH. He acted very wisely, because he acted legally. On the other hand, was it very respectful to the legislative body of which the Honourable gentleman was a member to endeavour to enter into this question when he knew it had been submitted to me and had been laid on this table? If you were to go back in the history of the Colony you would find no precedent for such a meeting, and you have totally misunderstood the scope of that section. When Mr. MERCER forwarded the Ordinance to the DUKE OF NEWCASTLE, His Grace at once pointed to this extraordinary provision that the Governor in Council was to frame rules or that they should be framed at a meeting of Justices. The DUKE of NEWCASTLE said the Governor in Council should do it; that it was extremely desirable that the prison regulations should be made, not by a Board of Justices whose proceedings may be guided by no settled principles, but by the Governor in Council. Now Mr, CREAGH acted according to law, he acted as a Police Magistrate and Visiting Justice ought to act, and though I have not seen or heard until now the two concluding letters that have been read, I approve of his conduct, and I have no doubt it meets with the entire approval of the majority of the Council ka
The Honourable W. KESWICK said the application of the Justices had no personal reference whatever, and he had brought forward the correspondence merely as a matter of information. He cast no reflection on any man. He was not yet convinced, however, that the application was an illegal one. The answers to Mr. CREAGH were of the simplest character, asking him for a reconsideration, as in the opinion of the gentlemen who addressed him he had taken a wrong view. If the gentlemen who addressed him were in error-if their application could not be legally granted-undoubtedly they were wrong, but he was not certain the interpretation put on that Ordinance was the correct one. He only wanted what was right.
His EXCELLENCy said that, as far as he remembered, Mr. CREAGH did not refer to his (the Governor's) opinion of the Ordinance. Mr. CREAGH referred to the opinion of the Attorney General, and the Attorney General gave his opinion that the application was illegal.
The Honourable W. KESWICK said it might be illegal to grant what was requested, but not illegal to make application. His EXCELLENCY said that was a delicate distinctive. His Honourable friend admitted it would be illegal to grant the application--
Honourable W. KESWICK said he did not admit this.
His EXCELLENCY said the Attorney General had given his opinion that it was, and any one reading the Ordinance, he thought, would take the same view. They had present the most eminent legal authority in the Colony, the Chief Justice, and he would perhaps have no hesitation in telling them whether it would be legal under the clause. They had also present a Queen's Counsel, a most eminent member of the Bar, and perhaps he would favour them with his opinion. It was a matter of some importance because Visiting Justices should be the first to observe the law.
The Honourable W. KESWICK said perhaps His Excellency would read the application, as he appeared not to have understood it. He made no reflection on any man, and hoped he would be the last person to do anything of the kind.
His EXCELLENCY said the matter was most pertinent to the subject under discussion-the enlargement of the Gaol, but at the same time, as the correspondence was read, and as Mr. CREAGH, who was entrusted with the important Office of Police Magistrate, had expressed an opinion, quoting the words of the Attorney General, that he would have been exceeding his powers according to law if he had complied with the request, it came to this, either that Mr. CREAGH was right or that the gentlemen making the application were right. He had no hesitation in saying Mr. CREAGH was right.
The Honourable W. KESWICK said he did not desire to question the answer to the first application. His EXCELLENCY said the position of a Police Magistrate could not be lightly brought before the public by any man without a full explanation, and having it made clear who was right and who was wrong according to law. If Visiting Justices think the Police Magistrate is wrong with regard to the interpretation of an Ordinance they had a right to say so, but if the Magistrate was right it was his duty to see that it was made clear. The Honourable gentleman said it might have been illegal for Mr. CREAGH to have complied with the application, but that that did not render it illegal for the Justices