December 21, 1208.]
in
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT:
motion to go into committee. I think it is, better to discuss it now than on the third reading, since, if we passed this motion, learned members of the Law Committee would be nullified when they came to deal with it. We have also to
former highly esteemed Governor, and I con- fidcntly believe, when you come to the considera- tion of this petition, that the committee will not in. any way consider what may have been the opinion of some former governor, because, if Sir Matthew Nathan had sat to hear this petition consider the petition laid before the he would not have changed his mind. Sir, I Council to-day, and spoken to by the learned will pass from that, because I have called it what counsel who has just left the room. I believe it to be, an inadvertence. It was an
I propose further to say a word or two with regard to my unfortunate allusion to make to a committee position in regard to this bill. It appears to me having a majority of officials, and a very that the principle involved in this bill is one, if unhappy one for the feelings of those who come I may go express it, of mesthetics against utility. before the committee, but I feel certain it If it is clearly understood by this Council that will not affect the official mind. Besides, the community consider this tramway is neces- I trust your Excellency will recollect, and I am sary for the business and for the general sure you will, that this is a private Bill. The purposes of the colony no doubt this private committee will not vote upon this Bill as if it bill will be put through. If, on the other was an important public measure. The allusion, hand, it is considered not to be so, we must I suppose, was made for some purpose: I take bear in mind that one of the most beautiful it that one of the standing in the Council of the parts of the island will be disfigured by the Director of Public Works would not make an carrying out of the project. I should regret allusion like that without some object; therefore extremely from that point of view to see a tram. I am bound to comment upon it. I can only way on fifty feet trestles carried through the suppose that he asked that question for a Glenealy Valley, but Hongkong does not depend purpose, the object being to impress the com. for its prosperity on its scenery, or we should not mittee unfavourably, so appeal to members to hear so much of trade depression. Residents decide this question altogether apart from any generally come here for other purposes than to person's opinion. Sir, I ask the committee to view the scenery, so it remains for us to say remember the salient facts. The Bishop has whether or not the tramway is really required told us that the cathedral was removed to its for the convenience and business of the colony. present site for the purpose of securing that No doubt many of the unofficial members will be. which will be take a TUM worshippers if able to reflect opinions which are held in tho the railway passes over this present community and as this is a private bill and has bridge, namely, peace and quietness been much altered since it passed its second read observance of religious performances. Heing all members of the council will be able to told us that when he first came here 22 rote upon it entirely unfettered. and to give years ago the cathedral Was in Well. their own personal opinion as to whether or ington Street, but as the town increased the not it should be carried through. The bill is noise became distracting, and they removed to a very long one and there are connected with the place where they now are. We have been it various plans which require a good deal of on the present site for 22 years, and I do appeal study, and which have not been reproduced to to you to preserve to us that which we have the council, and I therefore do not propose to had for 22 years unless there are any exigent put the motion to the vote to-day but to adjourn public reasons why it should be taken away. We this debate after those who wish to speak have appeal to the committee for considerate treat- done so until our next meeting. As regards the ment when a scheme is proposed which will petition to which we have just listened, deprive us of that, and a scheme which is in no it was perhaps premature to have heard sense necessary for the undertaking projected. that on the motion now before the Council, We are only opposed to that portion of the It should rather. I think, have come tramway which it is proposed to carry over the after the Council goes into committee to trestle bridge. If there were no other way of discuss the second clause of the Bill which going to the Peak except over that trestle deals with the question which route the tram bridge I should be silent, but when | should take. The point which we now have to there is an alternative route which will
consider is the general principle of the bill as to give us the quiet that is desired, and leave us in whether or not there should be a tramway. It peace, I do ask that that route should be insisted will be time enough to consider in committee upon. This is a private undertaking for the when we come to clause two whether this purpose of putting money into the pockets of route in red which has been alluded to those promoting the tramway: it is a speculation, involves the cutting off of a considerable nothing more or less. It will be useful to the portion of the Public Gardens and some exceed. public no doubt, but still it is a private specula.ingly deep cuttings which I speak under tion, and absolutely a matter of pounds, correction-I think will be something like 40 shillings and pence. I say you ought not or 60 feet deep and which will require consider- to disturb the peace, quiet and calm which able cutting away over the slope of the embank. should reign, and which hitherto has ment. I understand that the substitution for reigned in this vicinity, and I appeal finally to them of a tunnel is not from an engineering the committee not do so, because if you do what point of view possible because in order not to is proposed to be done we are absolutely left kill the trees it would have to pass at a greater without a remedy. We could not get compens-depth than 15 feet; and 15 feet is the minimum ation, because the work was authorised by the legislature. I thank you gentlemen of the committee for hearing me, I trust that the reasons I have mentioned may be deemed by you sufficient to warrant your coming to the conclu- sion that the route as proposed ought not to be assented to.
Counsel and the witnesses then withdrew. HIS EXCELLENCY-Gentlemen, The motion before the Council refers to a bill which was
depth of grading they could pass, The line in blue has been selected in the alternative 28 inflicting least injury
on the Public Gardens but as I have said those questions as to details of the different routes more properly belong to the discussion on clause three, if we agree to the general principle of having this tramway. The institution of this scheme I believe interfered with the exten. sion of the existing tramway which would other- wise have been carried down to Queen's Road, and I think I am right in saying that arrange- ments had practically been completed with the Military Authorities for the acquisition of certain lands belonging to them required for that purpose.
Hon. Mr. HEWETT-Your Excellency-You spoke just now of having a discussion this afternoon as to the working of this Bill on the
introduced a good many years ago. The Council is not in committee as was supposed by the learned gentleman who has just left. The motion is whether we shall go into committee or refer the Bill to the Law Committee. We are still in Council. The Bill was introduced several years ago under circumstances which are very different to those which exist to-day The differences are these: When the proposal was first made it was under-motion to go into committee and afterwards I stood that the tramway would be competitive with the one already existing. Since then I understand an amalgamation has taken place. Secondly, it was proposed that it should traverse a different route to that suggested to-day. In the third place, since this bill passed its second reading it had been wery considerably altered in many details. It is therefore, I think, permis- sible to discuss the general principles on this
understood you to say we should have a discus- sion at next meeting. Would it not be better to hold over the whole discussion until next week? My suggestion for doing that is the statement made by counsel, and as the re- marks made by yourself and by counsel are distinctly of an educational nature I think it would be very much to the advantage of un- official members of the Council if we have a
-449
further opportunity of considering them and also of finding out current opinion as the bill has not been discussed for over a year.
HIS EXCELLENCY-I will be glad to adjourn the discussion until next meeting.
SMALL DEBT COURT ORDINANCE. The ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the third reading of the Bill entitled An Ordinance to empower a Magistrate to hold a Small Debt Court in the New Territories and to regulate the proceedings in rolation thereto.-In doing so, he said-I have nothing further to say with regard to it, Sir, except that in the preliminary title the word debt should read "debts.
The COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded and the Bill was read a third time and passed.
MAGISTRATES ORDINANCE AMENDMENT. The ATTORNEY GENERAL moved that the Council go into Committee on the Bill entitled An Ordinance to amend The Magistrates. Ordinance 1890 and to effect certain other amendments in the Criminal Law.
In doing so, he said-With reference, Sir, to this order it will be in the recollection of the committee that at the last meeting two of the clauses stood adjourned for consideration, the first of which is the clause relating to stocks. It was pointed out at that time, Sir, by the hon. and learned member opposite having re- gard to the phraseology proposed to be adopted in the new clause, that there were certain ordin- auces declared by virtue of this Ordinance to be misdemeanours. I have had opportunity, with your Excellency's sanction, to confer with the hon. and learned gentleman upon those points. and have arrived at the conclusion, to meet what he desires in the matter, that the clause should be amended to make it perfectly clear that the particular ordinances mentioned are not to be included within the scope of the punishment imposed by stocks. That being so, Sir, I propose to omit clause 3, and to insert a new clause altogether, and I have so drafted this clause as to make it perfectly clear in future as to what offences stocks should apply. Instead of amending the principal ordinance I have prepared a new clause, and propose to set out as a schedule to the bill the four ordin- ances to which the hon. gentleman referred. That will clear up the question entirely. I propose to leave out clause 5 and substitute the following section (reads). That exactly re-enacts the second existing section of the Magistrates' Act with the amendment we have inserted here. And I also propose this proviso (reads). I may say that the hon. gentleman took exception to certain other ordinances, but as I have already pointed out to him, they are not ordinances which come within the magisterial jurisdiction at all. Personally speaking I don't think these four ordinances are really of such a character that a magistrate could impose stooks. In- asmuch as the law stands at present it is just as well to make it clear. The four Ordinances
are:
The Medical Registration Ordinance of 1884, the Statutory Declarations Ordinance 1893, the Sale of Food and Drugs Ordinance of 1896 and the Stamp Ordinance of 1901.
Hon. Dr. Ho KAI-Sir, I accept the amend- ment proposed by the learned Attorney General. i think the new section is certainly an improvement on the one struck out.
Clause 5 as amended then became part of the Bill.
His EXCELLENCY-The only other clause which has been held over in this Bill is the first subsection of clause 7. I agreed to hold that over for discussion at this meeting at the instance of the senior unofficial member, and I have taken the opportunity given last week of discussing the subject again with the Executive Council I find that the majority of that council are of opinion that the legislation proposed is reasonable and proper, in view especially of the pledge which I gave to the Council in committee that no regulation would be passed for a period of six months, during which time we should take steps to educate Chinese opinion both by posting notices and also by including the subject in the lectures delivered on sanitation and hygiene by Chinese lecturers. We have passed the second reading of the bill already, and there is no amendment at present before the committee. I would remind the committee that the amended clause as it stands does not make spitting a nuisance. It does not enact any prohibition whatever against it at the present