the Secretary of State when the
Ordinance
'sent home.
home
its final shape in
Sug 14/10
tadd but that his Lordship gathers from
in passing Her Majesty that the Bill was
amended with respect to the principal point referred to in this letter viz. the definition of morphine
[See pp. 203, 207 Hong Kong Weekly Press of 14 Sep. The Ord. has now been passed - see p. 226 of H. W. P. 7 Oct. 20]
Secals 17549 gr. 9.21 Oct.
gm.7.21
ton Ball have to take technical advice on this Bill when it comes
Nawaz
as well faced this and
bhor for report and return.
alme 52
21·10·93
17549
Copy without sch.
0.0.
16953
Rect Rect 5 NOT 93
539
8. Finsbury Buildings
London, E.C.
Oct 4th 1893.
Sir,
I take the liberty to forward two copies of a Bill which has been introduced into the Legislative Council of Hong Kong and to offer some observations on it for Consideration.
#tate.
stop
the
of
the Secretary of
is to
spring up
Its main (avowed) object is to suppress a trade which has sprung up among the Chinese of the lower class, of the hypodermic injection of Morphine.
I suppose no one will see any objection to this, but some of the Provisions appear to be open to grave objection.
I will confine myself first to the "injection of morphine" which according to the marginal summary is the object of Clause 3 (though the clause itself goes much further).
The Bill seems loosely drawn. For instance under Clause 4 any person may inject morphine into a patient for whom it has been prescribed by