488
1887 for 8 years, and knowing that
abuse of power by any official
any
can and would be, in this small
ht at once to the notice
PRony, brought of the Governor
with, I see no
or and promptly
danger
dealt
is sanctioning the Ordinance. Indeed the Regula = tions under it of 4th July, 1895 were published in the Gazette of 13th July.
am inclined to think that
if the few private carriages had been excluded from the Ordinance there would have been no
opposition. To have done this would, however, have looked like favouritions, and as it
recessary they should comply with traffic rules and as
is weave
Key
10
the
public roads there seems hardship
in a licence fee of $2 equivalent to
✓
2
4/4 sterling.
As regards any danger of the Captain superintendent of Police abusing his power
as to licences this is a very
remote.
remote contingency in Hong Kong and while section- & gives an express. appeal to the Governor such an appeal
of a
in practies exists against any action
Government Official.
I will now • proceed to deal seriatine with Mr Humphreys criti=.
cisms of " verbal defects in the Ordin
wanee,
Section 2 defines Private Ve=:
fiches" av
including
those which do
not require to be licensed under Qr= dinance 21 of 1887 (except those em=
crated in the Section )
adding
(a) Section 4,
Sub-section (B)
the words whether licensed
or not" intended to emphasize the fact that the omission to take outa licence, which
ought
clf to have been taken out, would not exempt the own,
or from the traffic and other
howw .
regula.
I admit the words might
have