December 12, 1208.]
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
Hon. Mr. WEI YUK-I quite concur with all the Hon. Dr. Ho Kai has said, and hope that the Council will see its way to postpone the second reading of the bill.
|
425
I have a list here which shows the particular, offences in which I have inserted the words sa they appear, according to the view which I have taken of it, in which certain offences would not be included. For instance the Licensing Act, brokers Ordinance, the Police Court Ordinance the Merchant Shipping Ordinance, the Pawn- No. 1 of 1845. Water Works Ordinance, Rogues and Vagabond and Malicious damage. All those would not come within the category and the result would be that stocks would not be imposed in respect of them. The hon. member drew attention to certain offences which come under the heading of misdemean. I have had an opportunity since he has been speaking of looking through them and there are only three offences which are not go- verned by the existing law, and are declared to be misdemeanours by statute. They are celebra- tion of unlawful marriages, disobedience of
ours,
an
order of banishment and disturbance of divine worship at St. John's Cathedral. These are declared expressly to be misdemeanours by statute. All I can say, speaking generally, is that two out of three would be perfectly legi. brawls in church and interferes with divine timate subjects for stocks. If a man goes and
worship I think the punishment of stocks is a very suitable punishment for him. all, however, left to the discretion of the They are Magistrates. They don't impose stocks because they have the power but they impose them
my
because the man before them is a criminal whom they wish to prevent reappearing from day to day before them in the Police Court. I think, Sir, therefore, that it is right at once to say that whatever course is adopted the objections taken by hon. and learned friend with regard to stocks are irrelevant. The particular cases to which he has alluded although they may strictly speaking come within the purview of the Ordinance really have no possible bearing. I don't think his objections are well founded aud. have no practical bearing at all.
be had up, and according to another clause unless it be amended in such a way as provision of this Bill instead of being to remove all the objections. And I think, put in gaol will be liable to a whipping. after all. that this is not a matter of very Then with regard to offices and flats. great urgency,
The Government would be With flats in European houses and flat exercising the wisest discretion in postponing occupied by business men regulations of this its consideration for some little time. I inten- kind will no doubt be a benefit, but Chinese|ded asking that the bill should be read a second tenement houses are let out in flats not as places | time twelve months hence, but in view of what of business but as residences. Spitting in all your Excellency said about amending clause 7. these places will have to be prevented. I
I think it would be enough if the second reading | appreciate Your Excelleny's statement that this of the bill could be postponed for a fortnight section is not being introduced against any or three weeks. particular section of the community but I venture to submit that it will be very difficult indeed for the general public to appre- ciate that statement, because the very large population of Chinese here who Hon. Mr. HEWETT-Your Excellency. In have been accustomed to expectorat- your opening remarks you referred to the fact ing not only at home but outside would con- that I was the representative of the Chamber of stantly be offending against the law without Commerce. That, no doubt, is my position here perhaps intending to do so. Habit is second and consequently my official designation, but nature and becomes a sort of involuntary act, I may state that anything I RBY at and a provision of this kind would I am quite this meeting is entirely on my own account as I sure deter a great number of Chinese from have not consulted the Chamber of Commerce in visiting this colony or regarding it as a desirable the matter. The hou, and learned unofficial place in which to live. We have already, Sir, had member on my left referred to one of the many experiences in measures dealing with clauses in the bill which makes the removal sanitary improvement of the colony, and I would of adhesive stamps punishable by stocks. I remind Your Excellency that we have recently presume the use of stocks in any case 18 found that the relaxation of the law has been exercised with the greatest possible dis- instrumental in promoting the diffusion of cretion by these officers to whom the power sanitary knowledge among the Chinese and is granted. Speaking from my own personal has obtained much better results than experience gained in the Criminal Court strict adherence to the letter of the law. II should Ray that the removal of ad- think if it is desired to inculcate abstention hesive stamps may lead to very serious frauds for from spitting in public or in offices, notices a great number of years, and from a commercial should be published warning the people not to point of view it is one of the most serious spit, and at the same time providing spittoons offences that can be committed and therefore I in offices. Let us try that measure first. think the law officers of the Crown should have I am quite sure that in time it would be the widest possible powers to deal with the successful.-Outside in the street what can we offence. If in certain cases the best means of do? Are we to give the police power to punishment is the stocks I think that power arrest everybody found spitting there or are we should be in the hands of the law officers who to instruct police officers to exercise certain can be trusted to exercise discretion. The discretion in allowing some to do it and not main point under consideration however is allowing others. If we strictly carried out the
The COLONIAL SECRETARY-Sir, one con clause seven, section three, subclause 18, with re- law I am afraid the gaol compound would not be gard to spitting. The hon. unofficial member on my
not help appreciating the eloquence of the sufficient to accommodate those arrested. If right and the hon. Chinese members have
senior unofficial member in defending what I you say the law will not be enforced strictly suggested that the discussion on this question suppose to be the ignorant members of the then I say first of all what is the use of having should be postponed. I do not see any necessity community from the grip of the brutal policeman a law on the statute book without enforcing it. for that at all. The question is a very old one and for spitting in the streets but he seems to have Again if we are to leave the discretion to they have had ample opportunity of considering forgotten that it is not spitting in the street common police officers we
It is spitting on the are in danger of and dicussing it. I do not see that anything that would be an offence. placing in their hands a powerful instrument will be gained by postponing it for a few weeks pavement. Alongside every pavement there is of oppression. I am not speaking in any
or a few months. We will be no nearer to a a gutter in which a man spits just as well disparagement of the police force of the solution than at the present moment,
can The hon. as he
spit in a receptacle placed in
& a lobby or colony and I hope the Captain Superintendent and learned member on my left appears to think
verandah. The will not think I am belittling the splendid force this spitting is to be absolutely prohibited amendment which Your Excellency proposed under his command. I am only putting it as a general principle. If you entrust these discre- tionary powers to a common, constable are you not running a danger of giving him power to do evil and become oppressive? Now, Sir. I know arguments have been advanced that in Singapore they have passed an Ordinance of this kind. But in Singapore they have managed to do away with the vexed question of subsidiary coin and what is more they have succeeded in establishing a Municipal Council. Does it follow then that we could follow them in these respects and in this particular instance would it not be a mistaken policy to follow Singapore? Sir, I approach this question with no prejudice whatever. As a strict sanitarian
say it is desirable in certain respects, and just now Your Excellency has drawn a picture which scientifically may be regarded as correct. That is to say that spit on the ground gets dried and the germs fly about and carry infection. On the other hand what is the substitute for spitting on the ground? A man has to carry a handkerchief with him. That article is a very necessary one, but if we were to stop people in the street and search their pockets we would find very few possessing it. Supposing they spit into handkerchiefs or sneeze into them the germs gets into the the handkerchief. Then they put it into their pocket, thereby infecting their clothes, which is just as dangerous. Or if they have not a handker- chief they may use their coat sleeve. What then? Does this not also carry infection? Is there any difference in spitting into a gutter or on the pavement or spitting into a coat? I submit there is not much difference 80 far as the spread of infection is concern. ed. Sir, for the reasons I have stated I can perceive a great deal of opposition to this alteration modifies the imposition of stocks. subject to alteration in committee.
|
cou-
on
and does not realise this under this clause the side streets are spittoons. The penalties are for spitting on the side walks and in public buildings. In supporting this what sider most wise and necessary reform the part of the Government-I say I am the last member to support any grandmotherly legis lation-I believe that this is a really seriously demanded reform and it is perfectly idle to suppose by putting up notices and asking the floating-Chinese population of Hongkong to gradually learn that they must not spit in certain premises is a waste of time. Much better go to the root of the matter at once and legislate. Although it is not made much of in the official returns. tuberculossis is of the most serious evils in Hongkong. We have an incredible number of deaths from tuberculosis which must be largely due to this disgusting habit. Therefore. Sir. I think the Government is perfectly fight to ask for legis. lation now. We can trust the Government that it will not be unduly enforced in the first place. We will gradually educate the Chinese and other sections of the community into realising that they must not spit promiscuously where they please. I trust the Government will not delay the legislation but proceed with the matter at
once.
one
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL-In reply to the remarks of the hon. gentleman on the subject of stocks, I am glad to say as I told you before that this definition has been the subject of most mature consideration. My hon. friend will probably say that the other definition was equally so. It has been difficult to get a de- finition in anything like the exact terms of what we wish to carry out. I think, Bir, my hon. and learned friend will find that the
room or
to submit to the Council in committee I think will probably meet the objections of the hon. member and I will read it to you, It runs :
First sub-section of clause 7-For the purpose of promoting the sanitation and cleanliness of public places the Governor in Council may at for the following purposes: (a) For the pro- all times hereafter make and vary regulations
hibtion of spitting.
.upon the foot.
way or public street and in all such buildings and vehicles, trams, railway cars, and other pla ces as may be described in such regulations. (b) for the imposition of penalties for the violation of any such regulations and for prescribing the mode of their recovery. Such regulations shall be published in the Gazette and shall have the force and effect of law in the same manner as if they were incorporated in this Ordinance." The effect of that would be that this new law would be limited entirely to the public places to which. I have mentioned, wharves, jetties, footways of public streets and only to such buildings se I think the hon. member will credit the the Governor-in-Council may prescribe. Governor-in-Council with the use of discretion in the selection of buildings that would be prescribed. I trust, Sir, that with this explana tion hon. members will accept the bill on the understanding that in committee the section to which I have alluded will be amended in the manner just described.
Hon. Mr. GRESSON-I should like to saak if we do not accept the amendment in committee what will be the result if the Bill is read a second time ?
HIS EXCELLENCY-If the bill is read a second time the principle would be accepted but the details of wording of the amendment would be