On which that Memorial was founded, and of which none are refuted; now, except by an occasional denial so much as noticed, by the "Despatch" or better in questions whilst the silence of the Governor as to certain allegations would seem to confess them to be true. They afford to pass by the repeated yet unfounded assumption that their Committee consists of persons not one of whom have ever resided in China or Hong Kong or who have had any means of becoming practically acquainted with the doings of the Hong Kong Government. It is the stereotyped assertion, although an often refuted one; and it will be difficult to persuade Your Lordship that the great traditions upon which the Colonial empire of England was planted, and to which, according to the as yet unfulfilled prognostics of the founders of Hong Kong, as quoted in the former Memorial, the laws, government, and policy of that Colony - especially adapted as an example to the neighbouring Empire - are out of place in the present discussion or are not binding upon the present Government of that Colony, or that any objections to its proceedings which may be based upon those traditions ought to be considered as open to disparagement on the part of that Government as the mere "sentimental objections" of "well-meaning persons" in England, "ignorant of the circumstances which have produced and which justify a policy" (Paragraph 244).
It is at the same time confessed, that but for his local experience, the Governor would have subscribed similar remonstrances, and applauded himself for subscribing it (Paragraph 12).
Your Memorialists see the least reason to qualify in any way the adherence which they now express to the statements of their former Memorial. They trust that, by Your Lordship at least, it will be now considered; and, in considering it, that due weight will be given to the important evidence to which its marginal references will direct Your Lordship. But to one of those proofs they may now not unprofitably make particular reference, seeing that the "despatch" or letter before them contains the broad although unsupported assertion that the increase of gambling at Hong Kong was not due to any defect in the law or any remissness on the part of the local authorities.
The despatch of Sir Hercules Robinson of the sixteenth December one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two (1862), Para sixty-one, [transmitting Copy of the Minutes of the Enquiry into the conduct of the Registrar General of Hong Kong and Protector General of Chinese, which led then recently to the conviction and dismissal of that Magistrate] is the document to which your Memorialists refer. If, as has been stated, the grant of the Gambling Houses Farm has been in any way negotiated or conducted with or through that person, the document acquires a new and painful interest in its bearing on this question.
But it has an importance of its own; for it clearly proves not only the non-execution of the Ordinance of Hong Kong, and the other laws against Gambling, but also the connivance of the very particular subordinate to whom the Government would have looked for the practical fulfilment of their duty.
Page 14
Page 15
Jafew flommons
12, 13
AR111
and 15-60) pp 3-21.
...
of them
On w
expon which that Memorial was founded, and of which none are refuted; now, except by an occasional denial so much as noticed, _ by the "Despatch" or better in questions whilst the silence of the Governor as lo orang would seem to confess them to be true . They afford to pass by the repeated yet unfounded assumption that their Committee consists of persons not one
of whom hav ever rounded in China or Hong Kong or who have had any
mease of becoming practically acquainted with the doings of the Hong Kong Government. It is the
suchtages. plerectyped Adfechon, although an often refuted one; and it will be difficult to persuade Your Lordship that the great traditions upon which the Colonial empire of England was planted, and to which, according to the
as yet unfulfilled prognostics of the founders of Hong _Kong, as quoted in the former Acmorial, the laws govirement and policy of that Colony -especially adapted as an example to the neighting Empire gare out of place in the present discussion or are not binding upon the present Government of that Colony, or that any objections to its proceedings which
may
be based upon those traditions ought to be Considered as open to disparagement
on the part of that Government as the mere sentimental objections" of "well-meaning persons" in England, “ignorant of the circumstances which have produced and which "Justify a policy" " (Paragraph 244.) at so little to be
. defended upon principle, (ow it is at the same hive confessed, that but for his locals experience, the Governov han say
Sumilar remonstrance, and applauded hindef for subscribing it :(Paragrapl: 12)
would have subscribed
#t
tbt
14.
15
Jafew flommons
12.13
alde-
AR111
and 15-60) pp 3-21.
13
no reason to qualify in
Your Memorialists sce the least the adherence which theng
now express to the ofatements of their former Memorial. They trust that considered; -
by your Lordship at least it will be now and, in considering it, that due weight will be givens to the important evidence to which its marginalt zu references will direct Your Lordship – But to ove of those proofs they may now not unprofitably make particular reference, seeing that the "despatch" or letter before their contains the broad although unsupported aftertion that the increa
increase of gambling at Hong Hong past was not due to any defect in the laid or any
array Dupureness
Ok..
in hine
the part of the local authorities. The Tespatch of for Fire Hércules Robinson of the
sixteenth December one
thousand eight hundred and. (862) Para sixty one", [liansmitting Copy of the Mantes" of that
" Enquiry " into the conduct of the Register Goal of
Hong Kong and "Protector General of Chinese "Ahtoldwhi I. P. which lead then recently ended in the conviction and dismissal of that Magistrate) is the document to which your Memorialists refer, If, as has been stated, the grant of the Gambling Houses Farm has been in any way negotiated
conducted with or through that person, the document acquired a new- and paniful witerest in its bearing
"this question .
couc - it hav
A 2-2-
ر مربع
Butit has Jen any
importance of its own';_ for it clearly proves not only the non-exccution of the Ordinance of Hong Kong, and the other laws against Gambling, but also the connivance of the one particular pubordinate to whom the Government- would have looked for the practical fulfilment of Their
naturally
Your
9
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.