16.
In this connexion we note that the argument has often been advanced that the food bought from hawkers stalls may be taken into houses, that are in no better state of cleanliness for purposes of storage and consumption than the stalls, and that the emphasis on the risk of contamination in the case of the food stall loses point if the food may equally become con- taminated when taken into the houses. We regret we cannot accept this argument as any ground for abandoning entirely either the attempt to secure cleanliness on cooked food stalls or the already decided policy for their eventual abolition. It appears to us that food sold in the streets might particular- ly readily become a source of contamination for transfer into the houses, and that even if complete safeguards cannot be devised to take effect within dwellings, adequate precautions should at least be taken in the streets, and that any partial achievement in this regard has value, even if perfection is not attained.
(iii) It is clear to us that hawkers, who have to pay no comparable overhead expenses, compete unfairly with shopkeepers and market stall-holders, who pay rents, rates, and their share of indirect taxes as persons who have a definite permanent stake in the Colony. Vegetable Hawkers, for example, throng the steps of Central Market and press so thickly round the Mong Kok market that would-be customers find it difficult to enter these markets at all at certain times. The competition of hawkers is so severe, we are led to believe, that shopkeepers even go the length of hiring hawkers to dispose of goods for them, and market stall-holders are induced to desert their stalls in order to hawk in the streets, thus aggravating a situation already serious enough.
(iv) Hawkers, on the evidence before us, which we see no reason to doubt, bring into existence gangs of criminal persons who prey upon them in order to exact so-called "protection money". Although the blame for these corrupt practices cannot be laid entirely at the door of the hawkers, the fact that they exist without licences or proper control in such vast numbers provides a fertile field for the extortion of bribes on the part of some unscrupulous persons in the lower police ranks and in the ranks of the Triad societies.
(v) As we have already pointed out above, the possibility of hawking attracts large numbers of destitute or semi-destitute persons to an already over-populated Colony. On this account alone we must urge upon the Government the desirability of exploring every avenue whereby the influx of surplus population into the Colony may be checked.
(vi) Lastly we cannot overlook the possibility that hawkers are most likely to act as receivers of stolen goods, especially broached cargoes from ships, for sale in the streets and to serve as a means of disposal for tinned foodstuffs which if exposed for sale in shops might be liable to seizure and condemnation.
Our general conclusion on the whole survey of the merits and demerits of the hawking system is that it should have no place in any ideal state of affairs or properly-regulated modern city of metropolitan status like Hong Kong, and that the ultimate object to be aimed at can only be, on any long-term plan, its total abolition in the urban areas, except possibly for a limited number of newspaper vendors and the pedlar class.