CO129-610-5 Marriages solemnized in Stanley Camp during the Japanese occupation and subsequent legislation for divorce 14-2-1947 - 27-6-1947 — Page 61

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

Series Prev Next

54185/47

Code

OUTWARD TELEGRAM

4 57

No. 728.

TO HONG KONG (Sir M. Young)

FROM S. OF S. COLONIES.

Sent 6th May, 1947- 12.00 hrs.

Your secret despatch No. 6 of 14th February, paragraph 3.

Page 24

Occupation Marriages,

It was not intended in my despatch No. 265 of 19th December, 1946 to suggest that the marriages should be made subject to a provisional Order, but merely that the Ordinance should follow the form of the Order in not (repeat not) Scheduling the marriages affected, since there is a danger that some marriages might be overlooked,

Page 3%

I agree that in view of the large number of marriages concerned, which was not before appreciated, it would be impracticable to consult all parties before a decision is finally reached.

Page 40

In these circumstances, however, I am advised that it would be desirable to retain a safeguard in the legislation on the lines of that which you agreed to omit from the last sentence of Clause 2 of the draft Bill, though the words should be more explicit than those originally suggested. The wording proposed by my Legal Adviser to replace the last three lines of Clause 2 is as follows:- "provided further that, where any such marriage would, but for this Ordinance, have been invalid and either of the parties thereto has subsequently, during the life of the other party, but before the commencement of this Ordinance, lawfully married any other person, this Ordinance shall not render the first marriage valid or affect validity of the subsequent marriage.

Page 15

Edit History

2026-06-18 23:31:36 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

54185/47 Code OUTWARD TELEGRAM 4 57 No. 728. TO HONG KONG (Sir M. Young) FROM S. OF S. COLONIES. Sent 6th May, 1947- 12.00 hrs. Your secret despatch No. 6 of 14th February, paragraph 3. Page 24 Occupation Marriages, It was not intended in my despatch No. 265 of 19th December, 1946 to suggest that the marriages should be made subject to a provisional Order, but merely that the Ordinance should follow the form of the Order in not (repeat not) Scheduling the marriages affected, since there is a danger that some marriages might be overlooked, Page 3% I agree that in view of the large number of marriages concerned, which was not before appreciated, it would be impracticable to consult all parties before a decision is finally reached. Page 40 In these circumstances, however, I am advised that it would be desirable to retain a safeguard in the legislation on the lines of that which you agreed to omit from the last sentence of Clause 2 of the draft Bill, though the words should be more explicit than those originally suggested. The wording proposed by my Legal Adviser to replace the last three lines of Clause 2 is as follows:- "provided further that, where any such marriage would, but for this Ordinance, have been invalid and either of the parties thereto has subsequently, during the life of the other party, but before the commencement of this Ordinance, lawfully married any other person, this Ordinance shall not render the first marriage valid or affect validity of the subsequent marriage. Page 15

Baseline (Original)

54185/47 Code OUTWARD TELEGRAM 4 57 No. 728. TO HONG KONG (Sir M. Young) FROM S. OF 8. COLONIES. Sent 6th May, 1947- 12.00 hrs. Your secret despatch No. 6 of 14th February, paragraph 3. 24 Occupation Marriages, It was not intended in my despatch No. 265 of 19th December, 1946 to suggest that the marriages should be made subject to a provisional Order, but merely that the Ordinance should follow the form of the Order in not (repeat not) Scheduling the marriages affected, since there is a danger that some marriages might be overlooked, 3% I agree that in view of the large number of marriages concerned, which was not before appreciated, it would be impracticable to consult all parties before a decision is finally reached. 40 In these circumstances, however, I am advised that it would be desirable to retain a safeguard in the legislation on the lines of that which you agreed to omit from the last sentence of Clause 2 of the draft Bill, though the words should be more explicit than those originally suggested. The wording proposed by my Legal Adviser to replace the last three lines of Clause 2 is as follows:- "provided further that, where any such marriage would, but for this Ordinance, have been invalid and either of the parties thereto has subsequently, during the life of the other party, but before the commencement of this Ordinance, lawfully married any other person, this Ordinance shall not render the first marriage valid or affect validity of the subsequent marriage. 15.

2026-06-18 23:31:36 · Baseline

View content