CO537-36 — Page 511

MiLeP

1672.

A Pers

-

686

circumstances. 3* shall iệt : 1 eð many rate, and not know where piague infacted rats were found. If people would take the trouble to catch rats themselves, and t daresay if they made up their minds to do so, they could satoh hundreds of thousands a year, it would greatly

help us,

and it would not matter so much if we axamined

them or not. We could examine a certain number of them.

14104 I think they would, if they were sure their houses were not to be treated the same as plagus infected houses.

141 04 20

A.

It seems rather important that if a plague infected rat is found in a house, something should be done to clean

that house.

The Chairmant-

05-

14105- Source Do you think, admitting that the ratcatchers are a ser of nuisance to the Chinese, it would be a wigs thing to

abolish them altogether ?

A

20

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference:-

C.O. 537

36

RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

A.

ol Q

08

A

14106

I would not like to see the abolished altogether. I'm talking about those offisigh råt kings going inte peoples houses, and making themselves objectionable, and taking advantage of their position to blasknail and

anney people.

I should like to see that annoyance done away with, bựt

if you leave the rát catching to the people, and gave a

•

faw cents for each, you will get bakz mmported (Pefa 1787) That we cant admit. If you pay for them, everybody wiïl''7

go in for rat breeding.

the trouble to And I dont see how people užii tah catch rate for nothing. Of course, there are certain people, who are intelligent mough to take care of themselves, but amongst the great mass of people, they dont believe that rate have saything to do with plagus. Ad, itting that there is annoyance and friction caused by these ratcatchers, would you still recommend that we retain this system, or should we abolish it, or modify

it ↑

14108

COPYRIGHT PHOGRAPHICALLY WITH-

REPRODUCED

OUT PERMISSION OF THE PUBLIC - NOT TO BE