196
SECOND APPENDIX.
THE HON. Mr. J. P. BRAGA'S ADDENDUM TO THE REPORT.
I sign the Report under reservation. At the final meeting of the Committee held on the 30th July I argued for the inclusion of certain documents as Appendices to the Report. My motion was defeated by a majority of votes.
2. The documents which were ruled out are:-
(a) The Petition against the Draft Bill to Amend the Law relating to Stamp Duty published in the "Hong Kong Government Gazette" dated 9th November, 1928;
(b) My Memorandum dated 11th June, 1929, with criticisms of the Hon. Mr. W. E. L. Shenton's Memorandum of the 6th February, 1929, and his Reply to my criticisms; and
(c) The letter of the 9th July from the Colonial Secretary, Straits Settlements,
and its enclosure.
3. I will recapitulate briefly the reasons I advanced for the incorporation of the foregoing documents in the Appendices to the Report. The Petition was presented to the Officer Administering the Government of Hong Kong and was numerously signed by Bankers, Firms, Associations, Merchants and Residents—both Europeans and Chinese- of the Colony. It is a valuable contribution to the question forming the subject matter of consideration by the Committee. To the presentation of the Petition is due the ap- pointment of the Committee. Since it has been thought necessary to print the Draft Bill of last November as an Appendix, even though it had been published in the "Government Gazette" of the 9th of that month, I am of opinion that it is all the more necessary that the Petition should also be incorporated in the Appendices. It has not been given official publication and may be lost sight of if the proposal to do away with blank transfers or to increase the scale of stamp duties on share contract notes is revived.
4. As regards my Memorandum, which is a criticism of the Hon. Mr. Shenton's proposals in reference to the Stamp Duty payable in respect of share transactions, frankly I must confess I cannot appreciate the arguments advanced for its exclusion. In brief, the arguments were: first, that it would make the report too bulky; secondly, that in the opinion of the learned Chairman of the Committee only "proposals" should be incor- porated in the Appendix; and, lastly, that the Report would be obscured by the greater volume of the Appendix. The first and third arguments can be disposed of by the fact that my Memorandum would not exceed three pages or so of print. Even for the sake of argument that it did, as a statement of reasoned observations on the Hon. Mr. Shenton's proposals its exclusion, in my opinion, is not justified, especially when, in reply, Mr. Shenton wrote to the Secretary of the Committee on the 14th June, that "paragraphs 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 also paragraphs 22 and 23 contain excellent creative suggestions. I think that the Committee would do well to consider these suggestions, with a view to their adop- tion.
I urged at the same time that, in all fairness to the Hon. Mr. Shenton, his replies to my criticisms should also find a place in the Appendix.
""
5. The value of the official communication from Singapore lies in the fact that when the new Stamp Bill was discussed in Committee at a meeting of the Singapore Legis- lative Council on the 25th March last, it was decided to reduce the flat rate of duty chargeable on transfers to 15 cents for every $100 of consideration. The original pro- posal was to charge on-
"certified" transfers 10 cents per $100, and "blank"
30
J
""
"
The flat rate of 15 cents per $100 is less than the Hong Kong rate of 20 cents.
Hong Kong, 31st July, 1929.
J. P. BRAGA.