April 1, 1896.]
The last report is that for 1894, dated 16th March, 1895, in which Mr. Ladds again refers to the matter :—
"I believe it is not yet decided to erect recep- tion lairs for animals, as recommended in my annual report as far back as 1888. They were also strongly recommended by the late Retrench- ment Committee."
In the report of the Retrenchment Committee at page 40 we find the following:-"We would also call attention to the absence from these Estimates (1894) of any provision for lairs for cattle on landing. Mr. Ladds says in his report for 1893, 'I regret that, so far, nothing has been done to provide inspection lairs, to which all animals should be conveyed directly upon land- ing, there to remain at least twelve hours before being inspected and passed into the permanent depôts or elsewhere. I reported to the Board upon this matter as far back as 1888 and in my annual report for the year 1892 I again referred to the subject, and pointed out that even where this method was adopted occasional cases of disease escaped detection; hence it will be easy to understand the risk attendant upon the present system of animal inspection in Hong. kong, where we have no such lairs at all. We consider that these should be taken in hand as soon as possible for the protection of our food supply, and for the prevention of any contagious disease amongst cattle and other animals. Should any such disease break out the loss caused by it and the cost of stamping it out will exceed the cost of the lairs." This report was signed by his Honour Mr. E. J. Ackroyd, Acting Chief Justice, Chairman, Hon. Č. P. Chater, Hon. J. J. Keswick, and Mr. T. Jackson.
MR. J. D. HUMPHREYS FINED for RIDING AT HAPPY VALLEY,
|
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
| which the same shall be published and con- tained." Therefore I propose first of all to put in the regulation and
Mr. Ewens-Your Worship. I might say that I admit the riding, but not the offence.
Mr. Johnson-Do you admit riding in the enclosure ?
Mr. Ewens-Yes.
279
repealed. The first regulation prohibits riding in that portion of the Recreation Ground which. is enclosed between the racecourse and the training ground. The second set of regula- tions deals with that portion of the Recreation Ground which is within the inner rails of the racecourse; therefore it includes the training track. If you look at the second set of regula-
Mr. Johnson-Inside the race course and tions carefully you will find that nowhere is training track ?
Mr. Ewens-Yes.
Mr. Johnson-Do you also admit that a copy of the regulations was put up under section 3 Mr. Ewens-I'll admit the regulation is up. Mr. Johnson-You also admit that Mr. Humphreys had no permission from the Govern- ment?
Mr. Ewens-No special permission; it might be implied permission. There was no permis- sion in writing or direct permission otherwise than by the by-laws in force. The by-laws in force, I submit, are those of the 7th November, 1892, not the regulation of the 3rd May.
Mr. Johnson-Until I hear what Mr. Ewens has to say there is hardly anything for me to say.
Mr. Ewens-I do not admit that the regula tion of the 3rd May is in force. The regulations in force are those of the 7th November.
His Worship-Those are in force and so is this one.
Mr. Ewens-I do not see how that can be, as the subsequent regulations are in force. These and the first one are inconsistent, as those of the 7th November permit riding.
His Worship-Where?
Mr. Ewens-At polo; in the schedule it says polo is permitted.
His Worship-That is riding for a specific purpose, and-
Mr. Ewens-You cannot possibly convict a man under this proclamation.
His Worship-Pélo is permitted on Mondays and Fridays.
Mr. Ewens-“The remainder of the ares inside the training course" is for the " public for general use," according to the schedule.
General use must include riding.
++
At the Poli e Court on Thursday, before Mr. T. Sercombe Smith, Mr. J. D. Humphreys was sum. moned on a charge that he "on the 21st March at Wongneichung Recreation Ground in this colony unlawfully did commit a breach of the regulation made by the Governor in Council on the 3rd May, 1892, under section 2 of Ordinance 8 of 1870, by riding over that part of the Wong-prohibited.
enclosed neichung Recreation Ground which within the racecourse and the training track without permission from the Government first obtained."
3
Mr. A. B. Johnson (Crown Solicitor) prose- cuted, and Mr. C. Ewens defended.
Mr. Johnson-I am instructed to appear for the complainant in this summons. The sum- mons was taken out against Mr. Humphreys for a breach of the regulation made by the Governor in Council on the 3rd May, 1892, under section 2 of Ordinance 8 of 1870. The
Ordinance empowers the Governor in Council to make regulations for the maintenance of good order and the preservation of property in public buildings and gardens and other places, and under section 2 a regulation was made on the 3rd May, 1892, by the Governor in Council and gazetted on the 7th of the same month, and it reads
as follows:-
24
Unless permission from the Government has first been obtained, riding over that part of the Wongneichung Recreation Ground which is enclosed within the racecourse and the training track is prohibited until fur. ther notice." The facts are that last Satur- day, 21st March, athletic sports were being held inside the training track, proper permission having been obtained. While the sports were going on Mr. Humphreys, who was with someone else, rode round the space reserved for the sports contrary to the regulation, as he had no permission from the Govern- ment. The summons comes before your Wor- ship under section 6" Every person who shall commit a breach of any regulation in force for the time being under this Ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanour and shall be liable on summary conviction thereof before a magistrate to a fine not exceeding $10 for the first offence and for every subsequent offence to a fine not exceeding $25 with or without imprisonment not exceeding one month." Section 8 says, "In all proceedings in any court, the regulations in force for the time being under this Ordinance shall be sufficiently proved by the production of a copy of the Gazette in
His Worship-Not if it has been already
Mr. Ewens-I cannot possibly see how you can convict under the regulation of the 3rd May | when specific regulations are laid down on the 7th November. The last regulations say that polo can be played, and you must ride across the ground to play polo. In regard to "public for general use" there are other forms of riding besides horse riding; and there was bicycle riding that day. It is notorious that bicycle riding goes on there, and both kinds of riding are included in the term " general use."
His Worship We have nothing do to-day with the question of bicycle riding. If that shall be prepared to decide question comes up upon it.
t
"
|
Mr. Ewens-1 contend that "public for general use" must cover riding. You cannot set up a regulation which is previous. The last regulations are the ones in force, and we are if it is said "public for general use entitled to the general use of the ground. Riding is particularly mentioned and allowed, and therefore you cannot possibly consider that the regulation of the 3rd May is any longer in force because under that regulation riding is only prohibited until further notice. A notice was issued on the 7th November and published in the Gazette for the "public for general use." Mr. Johnson-I do not know whether your Worship wishes me to address you on the point. His Worship-Do you wish to address me on that point? There is only one point raised.
Mr. Johnson-The only point raised is that the May regulation was repealed by implication by the November regulations. It is quite clear that the May regulation was intended not to be repealed expressly, because at the beginning of the regulations of Novem- ber it says,
"The following regulations made by His Excellency the Governor ip Conncil in supersession of the regulation contained in Gov- ernment notification No. 488 of 22nd Novem- ber, 1890." Therefore one regulation is repealed, but not the May regulation. As to the point that it was repealed because the two are incon- sistent, I may tell your Worship that it was intentional that the May regulation was not
riding allowed upon that portion of the ground' to which this set of regulations refers. Among other things they say that polo is allowed en certain portions of the ground on Mondays and Fridays. Well, this was not polo.
use.
45
His Worship-Nor on a Monday or Friday. Mr. Johnson-No. Then we find that the public generally use the remaining portion of the ground inside the racecourse.
In no way can riding be described 88 coming within the definition of "public for general The public means the people walking there. If people were allowed to ride over the place walking would be excluded. The only portion reserved for the public for general use is the remainder of the area inside the training course. Therefore even if riding came under that definition it would be necessary to prove that the riding was only within that ares. Upon this ground I submit it is quite clear that the May regulation has not been expressly re- pealed, and it is equally clear that there is no inconsistency whatever, because all the regula- tions can be interpreted.
His Worship This charge is brought under a regulation published in the Government Ga zette on the 7th May, 1892. There is no need for me to read it fully. It says that riding is prohibited until further notice. Then you have a subsequent set of regulations published in the Gazette on the 7th November, 1892, also governing the maintenance of good order in the Wongueichung Recreation Ground. That set of regulations distinctly says they are in super- session of the Government regulations of the 22nd November, 1890. That being so I have no difficulty in holding that the regulations
in
supersession of one set of regulations do not repeal the regulation of the 3rd May, 1892. On that I base my decision, and I fine the
defendant $10.
REPORT on the foreign traDE OF CHINA FOR THE YEAR 1895.
The following is Mr. Kopach's report on the trade of China for 1895, given in the Customs Returns of Trade and Trade Report:-
GENERAL.
Happily, neither the war with Japan, which was declared 1st August, 1894, and terminated on the signing of the treaty of Shimonoseki on the 17th April last, nor the riots and dis- quietude in certain provinces seriously affected or interfered with trade, which was remarkably active and prosperous throughout the year. The right to import machinery, conceded by the new treaty, gave an extraordinary impetus to spinning and industries, especially cotton weaving, in which enterprise Chinese and for- eigners have now invested much capital. Cheap labour and raw material are abundant, and with the continuance of the advantage which the East enjoys by the fall in the gold price of silver there is every prospect of China becoming a most im- portant manufacturing country, which will lead to a keen and formidable competition in textiles between East and West. Of money there was a plethora; interest on advances was reducd to 6 per cent. and on deposits to 4 per cent. per an- anm. Sterling exchange fluctuated over 11 per cent., and ranged from 28. 84d. to 3s. Ofd. per Shanghai tael for demand drafts. The occupa tion of the port of Newchwang by the Japanese in March led to a brief suspension of trade with that mart; it was, however, resumed in summer, but the demand for imports was reduced, while for the staple export of Manchuria, beans beancake, intended for shipment and
such abroad, there was
deficiency that the tonnage employed in the transport of this freight fell off by 37 per cent, as compared with the figures of 1894, However, notwith- standing the disquieting effect of war, the loss of revenue sustained, and the dislocation of the Liaotung traffic, the returns, both fiscal and statistical, of the foreign trade of China exhibit very satisfactory results.
.IH