age 10
۱۵
2
Colony, it was reported permanently, on 11th May, 1932,
but returned on 26th January, 1934, while the other absconded on 23rd September, 1933, and returned to her employer on 27th April, 1934.
(b).
On the other hand, out of the 132 girls
in the category "Muitsai registered but never visited" who were reported as still untraced in paragraph 3 (a) of my [] despatch No.354 of the 13th June, 1934, a further twenty have been traced during the period now under review, leaving 112 (132 less 20) still missing. Similarly, out of the 330 girls in the category "Muitsai registered and visited at least once" who were reported as still untraced in paragraph 3 (b) of the same despatch, a further thirty have been traced up to May 31st, 1934, leaving 300 (330 less 30) still missing. I have also to record that up to May 31st, 1934, there was a further increase of fifty- four girls in the category "Muitsai reported by the Inspectors as not to be found when the addresses shown on
the Register were visited". As pointed out in the despatch referred to above, the number of girls in this category, although it changes from day to day as girls who are reported missing are subsequently found again at other addresses, shows a gradual increase because there is a constant excess of the girls "reported missing" over those "reported missing but subsequently located again". On May 31st, 1934, this excess stood at 342 as compared with
288 on November 30th, 1933, a nett increase of fiftyfour.
(c).
The total number of Muitsai on the
Register whose addresses were unknown at the end of the
period under review, i.e. on May 31st, 1934, was therefore
754 (112 plus 300 plus 342).
3. (a).
During the period under review there
have been twenty four prosecutions under Ordinance 1 of
1923. Of these, fourteen prosecutions were for keeping
Page 10Page 11