5-
as including Regulations under it. If that is
so, then under section 41(3) and (4), a fine
could be inflicted by a magistrate for breach
of Regulations in Table "M", with the
alternative of imprisonment in default of payment
(section 57 of Ordinance No.3 of 1890.) The
provisions regarding appeals in section 41(2)(c)
would then appear to apply, as in the case of a
conviction for an offence under the Merchant
Shipping Act.
Incidentally, although I think it must
be assumed that Table "M" has legal force, I am
not sure how that comes about.
Section 25(4)
enables the Governor in Council to make regulations
for purposes which are covered by the Table, but
I see nothing in the Ordinance itself to give the
Table any force. As the Table was enacted with the
Ordinance, presumably it was intended that it should
have effect except so far as it was amended by
Regulations. Perhaps some such provision has
been removed by a Law Revision Ordinance.
It is to be observed that section 41(1)
repeals the Merchant Shipping Act in relation
to ships registered in Hong Kong so far as it is
inconsistent with the Ordinance, but, as redundancy,
and not inconsistency, is apparent on a comparison
of paragraph 6 of Table "M" with section 419 of
the Act of 1894, this repeal does not seem to
affect the question.
.11.31.