CO129-137 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [4-5] — Page 266

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

46

41.

263

that its provisions contravene at most unfavorably with the strict enactments introduced by myself as to responsibility for the state of the site.

Vide Ordinance No 9 of 1867.

limits wherein they are held responsible

I would also point out that the punishment by imprisonment, instead of merely a pecuniary penalty in the first instance, so available under the Ordinance now in force for offences against Regulations promulgated for either the suppression or control of Gambling

50. I also cannot admit Mr Anstey's assertion when, in alluding to enforcing the Chinese laws of Collective and mutual responsibility by means of the Tithing (Hea or Kap) and the hundred (Paau)

17-18-19 - Section 19-20

he describes them as institutions which had been expressly recognized by the Hongkong Legislative in Ordinances passed in 1844 and 1857.

51. The Hongkong Legislative had recognized no such thing, for the only Ordinance of the kind passed in 1844, whereby the Governor was authorized to appoint certain Chinese peace officers when recommended to him by the various towns, villages, and hamlets of the colony, and if the institution of the Hundred or Paau be of such importance as Mr Anstey represented it on the 4th of last February it is most remarkable that he did not include it in his model Ordinance of 1857. That Ordinance does

Edit History

2026-05-20 04:07:42 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
46 41. 263 that its provisions contravene at most unfavorably with the strict enactments introduced by myself as to responsibility for the state of the site. Vide Ordinance No 9 of 1867. limits wherein they are held responsible I would also point out that the punishment by imprisonment, instead of merely a pecuniary penalty in the first instance, so available under the Ordinance now in force for offences against Regulations promulgated for either the suppression or control of Gambling 50. I also cannot admit Mr Anstey's assertion when, in alluding to enforcing the Chinese laws of Collective and mutual responsibility by means of the Tithing (Hea or Kap) and the hundred (Paau) 17-18-19 - Section 19-20 he describes them as institutions which had been expressly recognized by the Hongkong Legislative in Ordinances passed in 1844 and 1857. 51. The Hongkong Legislative had recognized no such thing, for the only Ordinance of the kind passed in 1844, whereby the Governor was authorized to appoint certain Chinese peace officers when recommended to him by the various towns, villages, and hamlets of the colony, and if the institution of the Hundred or Paau be of such importance as Mr Anstey represented it on the 4th of last February it is most remarkable that he did not include it in his model Ordinance of 1857. That Ordinance does
Baseline (Original)
46 41. 263 that its provisions contra at most unfavorably with the strict enactments to Hesuseholders within the well defined introduced by myself as to responsibility Midday of site. Vide Ordinance 1868. limit's wherein they are held responsible I would also point out that the punish- ment by imprisonment, instead of merely tride Rections ! a peruniary penalty in the first instance, so available under the Ordinance mow in force for offences against Regulations promulgated for either the suppression on control of Gambling 50. I also cannot admit M? Anstey's apertion when, in alluding to enforcing the Chinese laws of Collective and mutual Cresponsibility by means of the Tithing (Hea on Rap) and the hundred (Saar)- 17-18-19- No 9 of 1867. Sectiono 19-420- he describes them institutions which had been expreply recognized by the Honghong Legislative and 1857.0 51 in H Ordinances pussed in 18444 The Hong tong Legislative had recognized no such thing, for the only Ordinance of the Mind praped in 1844, whereby the Governor was authorized was one to appoint certain bhinese peace officers when recommended to him by the various tourno, villages, and hamlets of the balony, and if the institution of the Hundred on Paau be of such importance as M2 Anstey represented it on the Gr of last February it is most remonttable that he did not include it in his model Ordinance of 1857. That Ordinance joes
2026-05-20 04:07:42 · Baseline
View content

46

41.

263

that its provisions contra at most

unfavorably with the strict enactments

to

Hesuseholders within the well defined

introduced by myself as to

responsibility Midday of site.

Vide Ordinance

1868.

limit's wherein they

are held responsible

I would also point out that the punish-

ment by imprisonment, instead of merely tride Rections

!

a peruniary penalty

in the

first instance,

so available under the Ordinance

mow

in force for offences against Regulations promulgated for either the suppression on control of Gambling

50. I also cannot admit M?

Anstey's

apertion when, in alluding to enforcing

the Chinese laws of Collective and mutual

Cresponsibility by

means

of the Tithing

(Hea on Rap) and the hundred (Saar)-

17-18-19-

No 9 of 1867.

Sectiono 19-420-

he describes them institutions which had

been expreply recognized by the Honghong

Legislative

and 1857.0

51

in

H

Ordinances pussed in 18444

The Hong tong Legislative had

recognized no such thing, for the only Ordinance of the Mind praped in 1844,

whereby the Governor was authorized

was one

to

appoint certain bhinese peace officers when recommended to him by the various

tourno, villages,

and hamlets of the

balony, and if the institution of the Hundred on Paau be of such importance

as M2 Anstey represented it on the Gr

of last February it is most remonttable

that he did not include it in his model

Ordinance of 1857. That Ordinance joes

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.