402
4.
OAA
the 10
dear sir,
of the Government live complaints
arrived in
Reads
CHARLES Dut
Constable
24
said Colony
" day of March 1873, and was sworn in as a constable immediately afterwards. From that date down to the 23rd day of August 1897, a period of 1
than 24 years, Your
Petitioner has continuously remained in the
of the said Colony. During the whole of that time only
were made against Your Petitioner. The first complaint took place
under the following circumstances:
In or before Your Petitioner's arrival in the Colony
some 45 Police
Officers
from Scotland joined the Hongkong Force, and according to practice then in vogue
were subjected to one monthly examination of their private parts for venereal disease.
Just before
Your
Petitioner's agreement came out to Hongkong, he had been subjected in England to a medical examination by the Metropolitan Police Surgeon and had been passed by
Dr. Marry, the Government
doctor in
Petitioner
signed
the
leave
again be examined.
On
finding local
Doctor, and acquiesced, for record. Before leaving England, Your Petitioner had been
told nothing about the monthly examinations, and consequently when he and nineteen other new arrivals were paraded for the first time and ordered to march in single file before a
were examined for the purpose of this monthly examination, the whole of the
including four
Petitioners refused to comply with what they conceived tended to degrade and debase themselves, as
new arrivals
regulation which
was unknown in the Metropolitan Police Force. For this action, they
were all suspended for three
days and were
When reinstated,
for the most part, the monthly examination, this objectionable regulation was abolished by the Government.
The second complaint took place under the following circumstances: During Your Petitioner's first year of service in Hongkong, in 1873 or early in 1874, Your Petitioner was on duty out at the old Star Ferry Pier from 8 pm to 12 o'clock midnight. After midnight, he struck off and left the Pier and walked to meet his relief, catching him about the City Hall, some 300 yards or so from the pier. Strictly speaking, he should not leave until within sight of his relief. For this trivial breach, Petitioner was fined
one dollar by the then Superintendent of
Police.
With these two exceptions, there has never been, down to the time of Recent investigations, a single complaint against Your Petitioner.
During Your Petitioner's twenty-four years' service in Hongkong, he has only been away from the Colony on leave for some few months, with the exceptions of a three or four days' visit to Canton.
(2)