549
812
(Enclosure 1.)
Report of a Commission appointed by His Excellency the Officer Administering the Government to consider a letter from the Superintendent of Victoria Gaol reporting the overcrowded state thereof.
1. On the 8th April last a Commission consisting of the Honourable the Acting Attorney General as Chairman; The Honourable A. LISTEL, Colonial Treasurer; The Honourable J. M. PRICE, Surveyor General: E. MACKSAN, Esquire, Acting Police Magistrate; Major-General GORDON, Superintendent, Victoria Gaol; The Honourable W. KESWICK, M.L.C.; C. P. CHATER, Esquire, J. P.; A. P. MACEWEN, Esquire, J. P.; P. MANSON, Esquire, M.D., J. P. was appointed for the purpose of considering a report of the Superintendent of the Gaol on the insufficient accommodation in that Establishment and the steps which should be taken to remedy the present state of things.
2. This Commission met at once and has held several sittings.
3. Two sub-committees were appointed, the first consisting of:
THE CHAIRMAN,
Honourable WM. KESWICK,
E. MACKEAN, Esquire,
Major-General GORDON,
Dr. MANSON, and
C. P. CHATER, Esquire.
to visit the Gaol at night and report on the state thereof, and another consisting of:
Major-General Gordon,
Dr. MANSON, and Dr. AYRES,
to enquire into the diet of the prisoners and to report what changes, if any, should be made therein.
4. The reports of these sub-committees are annexed hereto. (Enclosures 4 and 5.)
5. On the whole question submitted to us we beg to report as follows:
We deem it necessary in the first place to bring prominently before His Excellency the Officer Administering the Government the peculiar position of Hongkong, a position occupied by no other Colony of Great Britain.
Hongkong is situate at the very door of two of the largest provinces of China, and close to and in daily communication with Canton, one of the most populous cities of China. A famine or want of work in either of those provinces or in the city would naturally send a certain number of the inhabitants to Hongkong in search of work or of subsistence, whilst the presence in Canton of an active or severe Viceroy at once forces or induces many of the criminal class to change the scene of their depredations and to migrate to Hongkong, where even if detected a mild and lenient treatment awaits them instead of the sharp and cruel punishment which they would certainly receive in China.
This fact cannot be too steadily borne in mind in dealing with the question of punishment for offences.
6. In Hongkong we have to legislate not only for the Hongkong criminal class but for numbers of that class elsewhere, who are only too ready whenever the occasion arises to repair to this Colony and prey on it.
7. From a return furnished by the Superintendent of the Gaol (Enclosure 6.) it appears that of the 732 prisoners confined on the 11th April, 1886, 677 were Chinese; 274 were detained under sentences of six months; 114 from six months to twelve months; 60 from one year to two years; 39 from two years to three years; 44 from three years to five years; 142 from over five years.
Of those sentenced to penal servitude many have been convicted of simple Larceny after previous convictions for the same offence, and have been so sentenced as a long imprisonment was the only punishment left to secure the public from further depredation.
8. With respect to the deterrent effect of imprisonment this Commission has no hesitation in saying that under the liberal diet which at present exists in the Gaol and other circumstances attending imprisonment, a short detention, say under six months, is no punishment for an ordinary Chinaman, he is better fed and better housed in prison than outside and the work or task which he has to perform is certainly less than he would have to do to obtain a livelihood were he free. He is in almost unrestricted association with criminals like himself and has one and a half day's holiday a week, a thing which the ordinary Chinese labourer never enjoys.
9. On the question of punishment the Commission have considered the legislation as to whipping.
10. The law which at present regulates whipping is Ordinance 3 of 1881. It repeals the Ordinances or Sections of Ordinances hereinafter mentioned and provides whipping with a Patton when any offender has been convicted of a crime punishable under Section 19 of Ordinance 4 of 1865 or under Section 31 of Ordinance 7 of 1865, that is:
Section 19 of 4 of 1865 punishes any one attempting to choke, strangle, or suffocate any other person, or who by means calculated to choke, suffocate, or strangle shall attempt to render any one unconscious or incapable of resistance, and Section 31 of Ordinance 7 of 1865 punishes robbery with violence.
11. The only other case in which whipping is at present allowed is under Section 8 of Ordinance 16 of 1875 which permits a Police Magistrate to inflict whipping on any male offender whose age appears to him not to exceed 16 years when such offender has been convicted of Larceny or any offence deemed and punishable as simple Larceny.
12. The present Ordinance, viz., 3 of 1881, repeals
1°. No. 12 of 1865 under which whipping could be inflicted on any male offender convicted of a crime who at the time of the commission thereof had been armed with an offensive weapon or instrument or who at the time of, or immediately before or after the commission of the crime had used personal violence, or who should at any of the times aforesaid have attempted to render any other person insensible unconscious or incapable of resistance.
2°. Sections 2 and 3 of Ordinance 12 of 1845 which enacted banishment and branding for persons convicted of belonging to the Triad Society.
3°. Section 7 of Ordinance 12 of 1856 which allowed whipping for injury to trees, shrub fences, &c., and for obeying calls of nature in any exposed or improper place,
4°. Sub-section 9 of Section 28 of Ordinance 8 of 18.. relating to mendicancy.
5°. Section 9 of Ordinance 1 of 1886 for the suppression of piracy which enacted whipping for offences against that Ordinance.
6. Section 1 of Ordinance 3 of 1868 which prescribed whipping for persons convicted of child stealing or forcible detention of any man, woman or child for the purpose of selling them.
7. Ordinance 4 of 1872 which enacted branding and flogging for criminals in certain cases, and
8°. Section 7 of Ordinance 16 of 1875 which gave the Magistrate the power of whipping the offender once or twice for committing the following offences a second time or under aggravated circumstance, viz.:
Indecent assault,
Indecent exposure of his person,
Assault with intent to rob,
Common assault committed in a brothel.
Common assault committed at or in connection with any riotous assemblage,
Malicious injury to property.
13. The Commission have also heard Dr. AYRES (Enclosure 7.) and Mr. WISE, the Police Magistrate, at present Acting Registrar of the Supreme Court (Enclosure 8.) and have carefully read the several despatches which have passed between the several Secretaries of State and successive Governors of Hongkong on the subject of Gaol accommodation and penal punishments (Enclosure 9.)