arrived at the following conclusions:
1. We cannot altogether agree with the said Commission in the recommendation of Corporal punishment for simple larceny: We are of opinion that such punishment for such offences is unnecessarily severe. We would, however, strongly recommend corporal punishment in the following cases:
(a) Juvenile offenders 16 and under;
(b) Old offenders having had two previous convictions or more;
(c) Snatching and snatching things from women and children;
(d) Robbery with violence, such as garrotting;
(e) Extortion and Blackmailing, and the sending of threatening letters or messages with the view of hindering the course of Justice or the carrying out of public duties;
(f) Intimidation and the like;
(g) Being found armed with dangerous weapons without sufficient reason or excuse;
(h) Returning from banishment;
(i) Armed attack on or entry into any dwelling house, shop, junk, etc.;
(j) Piracy;
(k) Indecent assault.
We do not consider the cutting off of the queues of prisoners to be an effective mode of punishment. With the respectable Chinese, the loss of the queue is considered a disgrace, but with the riffraff, it is a matter of indifference. And we further oppose this mode of punishment on the following grounds:
(a) It would prevent criminals from returning to the mainland opposite Hongkong, and perforce keep them in the Colony;
(b) It would, to a certain extent, close the door against future repentance;
(c) It would facilitate their evading ...