89
carried was
that they had no authority whatever to relay the provisions of the Act of Parliament, and the extent of the relaxation is shown by the fact that the number which the people actually
were more than 50 percent above the number which the Law as it then stood would have allowed. It is true that the Foreign Passenger Act of 1855 has omitted the Tonnage Check in Chinese Passenger ships-
but it has substituted a cubical as well as a superficial space check
which will have the same tendency that the Tonnage Check had, to limit the number that may be carried
in vessels that are low between decks. We have no doubt that this cubical measurement if applied to the ship in question, would have reduced considerably the number that otherwise would have been put on board her.
5. But while the Emigration Office at Hongkong cannot, in our opinion, be acquitted of blame, we do not think that any grounds exist for remitting the fine imposed
89
carried wat
that they had no authority whatever to relay the provisions of the Act of Parliament, and the extent of the relaxation is shown by the fact that the number which the repel actually
tecore than 50 perfent above the number which the Law as it then stood would have allowed. this true that the ffriese Sapenger Act of 1855 has omitted the Lounge fbeck in Chinese Papenzer ships-
but it has substituted
cubical as well as a
ac
superficial space thick
which
which will have the sand tendency that the Tonnage Check had, to limit the ruenber that may he carried
in
tepels that are low between decks. The have no doubt that this cubical measurdment if applied to the ship in question, have reduced considerably the number that aut
extion, woulo
hon
aught
have been put on board her.
5. But while the Enigation
Office at Hongkongf cannot
hi our
opinion he a
of blame, be
equitted
do not thin18.
thatany grounds exist for
cemitting the fine imposed
ого
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.