CO129-610-5 Marriages solemnized in Stanley Camp during the Japanese occupation and subsequent legislation for divorce 14-2-1947 - 27-6-1947 — Page 63

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

Series Prev Next

Wt 29416/552 9/46 50m. S. & S. Ltd.

Cô.

Miss Whyte 3/5

Mr. Robert

Mr. Mayle.

Mr..

Juz 5.5

525ati

Mr...

54185

loded

1200hs

6/5/470 61

Permt. U.S. of S.

6- MAY 1947

Parly. U.S. of S.

Secretary of State.

DRAFT.

CODE (1)

GOVERNOR,

HONG KONG.

No. 728

Your secret despatch No. 6 of 14th February,

paragraph 3.

1. Occupation Marriages.

(17/54185/46) 2. 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,

FURTHER ACTION.

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.

4. 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:-

/"and...

Edit History

2026-06-18 23:31:47 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

Wt 29416/552 9/46 50m. S. & S. Ltd. Cô. Miss Whyte 3/5 Mr. Robert Mr. Mayle. Mr.. Juz 5.5 525ati Mr... 54185 loded 1200hs 44 6/5/470 61 Permt. U.S. of S. 6- MAY 1947 Parly. U.S. of S. Secretary of State. DRAFT. TELEGRAM CODE (1) GOVERNOR, HONG KONG. No. 728 Your secret despatch No. 6 of 14th February, paragraph 3. 1. Occupation Marriages. (17/54185/46) 2. 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, FURTHER ACTION. 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. 4. 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:- /"and...

Baseline (Original)

Wt 29416/552 9/46 50m. S. & S. Ltd. Cɔ. Miss Whyte 3/5 Mr. Robert Mr. Mayle. Mr.. Juz 5.5 525ati Mr... 54185 loded 1200hs 44 6/5/470 61 Permt. U.S. of S. 6- MAY 1947 Parly. U.S. of S. Secretary of State. DRAFT. TELEGRAM CODE (1) GOVERNOR, HONG KONG. No..7.28 Your secret despatch No. 6 of 14th February, paragraph 3. 1. Occupation Marriages. (17/54185/46) 2. 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, FURTHER ACTION. 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 în viewof 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. 4. 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 explicit than those originally suggested The wording proposed by my Legal Adviser to be more replace the last three lines of Clause 2 is as follows:- /"and

2026-06-18 23:31:47 · Baseline

View content