}
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
THILL C.O. 8
יוו וויווווייייין
885
21 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
200
seems not merely unwise but positively dangerous to force estates to have recourse to criminal proceedings.
Section 141.-First offence-penalty 5s. or 7 days.
Subsequent offence-penalty 10s. or 7 days. Section 144.--In line 4 substitute "may for immediate report to the Protector and to the local Inspector and for offer of reward.
Section 145.-Omit.
for "shall" (vide supra). Provide
Section 146.-Absence for a week should be necessary to constitute desertion. Penalty:
First offence-10s. or 14 days.
Later offence-20s. or 3 months.
4
may "for "shall" in line 4.
In Form 28 substitute for " complexion "the words " marks of indentification." Section 150-Omit. It is doing harm. Has it ever done any good? Section 151.-Substitute Section 152.-Perhaps be useful. If monthly lists of defaulters with particulars were posted up at each wilfully or negligently employs or harbours" would police-station, post office, &c., an employer who gives a man regular work without comparing him with the defaulters' description would possibly have to prove that he was not negligent. Each estate might get a copy of the list. If harbouring or enticing away are common evils then the remedy publication of lists. If the evil
is not great the trouble may be excessive.
Clause (b) of Section 152 would be covered by the proposed additional section in Part VIII.
Section 155 (1).-After" to the Protector add "the local Inspector of Immi- gration and, if a complaint has been lodged before a Magistrate, to such Magistrate, to the Police in charge of the nearest Police Station (and to the Inspector-General of Police) ".
Section 156.-Is needless and should be omitted. It is a temptation to incom- petent managers and others.
Part X.
Section 162.-We do not know why 1881 is taken as the starting point. One case of a marriage effected before that date but not now registerable was quoted
to us.
Section 165. We think the words "personal law" had better be omitted. The question as to what each individual's personal law is might be subject of endless litigation.
Section 166.-To remove every possible obstacle to the registration of marriages, applications to register, &c., might be allowed to be made to Inspectors of Immi- grants. We also think that in each local area a limited number of Brahmin priests and Musalman mullas should be recognised as marriage registrars, and as such required to give certificates to parties, to keep registers, and send copies to the Registrar-General.
Sections 174 and 175.-We think that District Courts might be the Courts of first instance.
Section 178.-Inspectors might have powers within the areas allotted to them. If Brahmin priests and Musalman mullas are recognised, it might be desirable to provide for the special registration of marriages already effected. But Section 172 may meet this if the question is raised.
Section 198.-We think that in the ninth line "shall" should be substituted for "may," It is unwise to keep on useless men who cannot be expected even to feed themselves by their labour. The section should require the Protector to arrange for the speedy repatriation of those declared to be unfit under this section.
Section 209.-After an indentured immigrant has earned $280 he should be entitled to claim a certificate of exemption on payment of commutation money at the rate mentioned in Section 199. Only good workers will avail themselves of this, and they should be encouraged. The new arrival will benefit by having an object lesson to counteract the influence of the wasters and generally to stimulate him. The agreement will be more attractive if commutation after four years is promised. Section 210.-There should be a proviso authorising the Protector to refuse to exclude periods of absence if, in his opinion, the conditions attached to employment on estate were such as to contribute to the loss of days.
201
Section 214. It will be seen that Section 136 penalises an employer who does not require a certificate, but there is no penalty for refusing to give one.
Section 215. In the first line substitute "shall " for "
If desirable, an may. appeal from the Government Medical Officer to the Surgeon-General or a Board may be allowed.
Section 225.-We think it would be reasonable to require that the right to return passage should be claimed within five years after it has accrued.
As regards Clause (1) we have noticed that though a number of destitute or disabled passengers are repatriated a considerable number of such immigrants, of more than ten years' standing, profess to be anxious to return. steady repatriation of the destitute if each Inspector was authorised to make up a list It might ensure the of 20 or 25 yearly.
Section 232.--See suggestions made above for an effective substitute for the formal procedure herein described.
Section 233.-Certain forms have already been proposed for adoption. The forms and returns should be such as the Surgeon-General, with the approval of the Government, prescribes.
Section 234.-The fee for a duplicate certificate form should be one shilling in all cases.
Section 235.-Would not this offence be covered by the ordinary law? If so, it would be undesirable to add a special provision to be embodied in the agreement.
Section 245.-The medical records of the gaol suggest that Magistrates overlook this section.
Section 247.-Pending an amendment of the law as regards the punishment of first offences, the Protector should appeal freely against the heavy sentences now imposed on first offenders.
Section 250 and 252.-It would be well if the Protector or the local Inspector were notified also in all cases.
As regards the working of the penal sentences of the Ordinance, the sentences inflicted by Magistrates are often very severe. We have been told that such sentences
are sometimes inflicted in spite of requests for leniency by prosecuting managers. It is unlikely that fines of £1 or £2 will be paid, and managers generally state that a man who has been in gaol for upwards of a fortnight usually goes from bad to worse. The sentences are deterrent neither to the individual nor to immigrants generally. If small fines are imposed, and time is given for payment, perhaps at the rate of a week for each 25 cents, there is a reasonable chance that the fine will be paid. This will imply steady work by the offender, and a reduction in prison expenses. If the fine is not paid matters are no worse than at present. Managers with whom we have discussed this strongly deprecate recovery of fines through the estate pay offices. We accept their view, especially as most of them will be glad to pay in fines voluntarily at the request of the offenders. If fines are paid, both the offender and other immigrants on the estate will realise the disadvantage of mis- conduct. It would, we think, be desirable that a Government circular should point out to Magistrates that, at least in cases under the Ordinance, heavy sentences did not reduce crime, but manufactured criminals. The Magistrates are sometimes inexperienced, and in the absence of a system of regular scrutiny of their proceedings instructions in the form of a circular seem necessary.
Imprisonment.
The present arrangement of sending to the common gaol persons convicted of offences under the Labour Ordinance is unsatisfactory. We recognise that the gaol authorities try, as far as possible, to employ them apart from the common criminals, but the fact remains that the two classes of prisoners must be brought together, and that the association is demoralising to the immigrant, whose offence is not ordinarily a crime. We think that separate prison accommodation and employment should be provided for offenders under the Ordinance. We understand that Government needs labour, and can give employment on its experimental farms, and the additional cost of supervising the work on such farms would probably be slight. Absconding might be checked by severe punishment.
Estate Management.
We recognise that many managers, doubtless the great majority, arrange to hear complaints or listen to requests made by their employés. It is obvious on some
33391
04
202