13
45.
45. R.T. Barrett
Tas newspaper report.
DESTROYED UNDER STATUTE
25.7-29
46. Ims Hosewood
29.8.29
Trs enthrip giving fourther information no saras referred to wis od 38.
47. Ms. Ha removi
5.9.29
Case
of CHUNG
KEI
48. My. Haslewood
5.9.29
Tur. copy
b. from Auti. M. T. Eve 7
of H.K
16
Ses" for chin. Aff.
Nos. 45 and 46 both refer to the case
ulon which we have already ushed the Lov. To
(in 33) and I think we may
report(in No.
repo
await that report before taking any action.
★
No. 45, however, is addressed to Mrs.
"as she prefers to be called Webb, and she may prefer to make an immediate
answer to the effect that the Governor has
already been asked to report on this case,
and further consideration of it will be
postponed uniti his report is received.
No. 45, however, raises the question
of the Factory Code in Hong Kong. I attach
a copy of Ordinance 22 of 1922 dealing with
the employment of children. It will be
observed that it refers only to children under
the age of 15 years; the exact age of the
child in this case is not clear, but, apparently,
she was over 15, and the Ordinance would,
therefore, not apply. It is, however, for
consideration whether the Factory Code should
be