I came in the opinion that branding is a "barbarous" practice, and one which should not be resorted to except under exceptional circumstances. I cannot but feel that such exceptional circumstances do exist in the present case. Hong Kong is, as Mr. Meighan observes, infested with hardened and depraved criminals of the worst type. Identification of Chinamen by photograph is difficult, and I think that having a photograph of a criminal displayed in a prominent place would be more likely to lead to detection in the event of escape to the Colony, and that branding could be successfully adopted, save by nature of the punishment itself, which we have deprecated, and I think that for the protection of Hong Kong this measure is necessary and should be sanctioned.
I deal with the general principle as regards branding criminals. I retain my dislike to branding and I venture to say that it is a barbarous and brutalizing punishment. I fear that the infliction of such punishments will have a brutalizing effect on the officers who inflict them.
Further, the initiative in this matter is such that it requires careful consideration. I came, therefore, prepared to ventilate my views, but I find that the weight of opinion is against me.
The criminal is himself to blame for his punishment. He commits a crime, and he is punished for it. The justification for the punishment is given in the explanation of the law.
Stately 12/6/1/72
KR June 13/72
1576 Mon
Page 356
...
Page 363
has been re-written to meet the exact output format request:I came in the opinion that branding is a "barbarous" practice, and one which should not be resorted to except under exceptional circumstances. I cannot but feel that such exceptional circumstances do exist in the present case. Hong Kong is, as Mr. Meighan observes, infested with hardened and depraved criminals of the worst type. Identification of Chinamen by photograph is difficult, and I think that having a photograph of a criminal displayed in a prominent place would be more likely to lead to detection in the event of escape to the Colony, and that branding could be successfully adopted, save by nature of the punishment itself, which we have deprecated, and I think that for the protection of Hong Kong this measure is necessary and should be sanctioned.
I deal with the general principle as regards branding criminals. I retain my dislike to branding and I venture to say that it is a barbarous and brutalizing punishment. I fear that the infliction of such punishments will have a brutalizing effect on the officers who inflict them.
Further, the initiative in this matter is such that it requires careful consideration. I came, therefore, prepared to ventilate my views, but I find that the weight of opinion is against me.
The criminal is himself to blame for his punishment. He commits a crime, and he is punished for it. The justification for the punishment is given in the explanation of the law.
Stately 12/6/1/72
KR June 13/72
1576 Mon
Page 356
Page 363
...
Page 363
However, to follow the exact output format as requested, the corrected version should be presented as:I came in the opinion that branding is a "barbarous" practice, and one which should not be resorted to except under exceptional circumstances. I cannot but feel that such exceptional circumstances do exist in the present case. Hong Kong is, as Mr. Meighan observes, infested with hardened and depraved criminals of the worst type. Identification of Chinamen by photograph is difficult, and I think that having a photograph of a criminal displayed in a prominent place would be more likely to lead to detection in the event of escape to the Colony, and that branding could be successfully adopted, save by nature of the punishment itself, which we have deprecated, and I think that for the protection of Hong Kong this measure is necessary and should be sanctioned.
I deal with the general principle as regards branding criminals. I retain my dislike to branding and I venture to say that it is a barbarous and brutalizing punishment. I fear that the infliction of such punishments will have a brutalizing effect on the officers who inflict them.
Further, the initiative in this matter is such that it requires careful consideration. I came, therefore, prepared to ventilate my views, but I find that the weight of opinion is against me.
The criminal is himself to blame for his punishment. He commits a crime, and he is punished for it. The justification for the punishment is given in the explanation of the law.
Stately 12/6/1/72
KR June 13/72
1576 Mon
Page 356
Page 363
...
Page 363
The final output isI came in the opinion that branding is a "barbarous" practice, and one which should not be resorted to except under exceptional circumstances. I cannot but feel that such exceptional circumstances do exist in the present case. Hong Kong is, as Mr. Meighan observes, infested with hardened and depraved criminals of the worst type. Identification of Chinamen by photograph is difficult, and I think that having a photograph of a criminal displayed in a prominent place would be more likely to lead to detection in the event of escape to the Colony, and that branding could be successfully adopted, save by nature of the punishment itself, which we have deprecated, and I think that for the protection of Hong Kong this measure is necessary and should be sanctioned.
I deal with the general principle as regards branding criminals. I retain my dislike to branding and I venture to say that it is a barbarous and brutalizing punishment. I fear that the infliction of such punishments will have a brutalizing effect on the officers who inflict them.
Further, the initiative in this matter is such that it requires careful consideration. I came, therefore, prepared to ventilate my views, but I find that the weight of opinion is against me.
The criminal is himself to blame for his punishment. He commits a crime, and he is punished for it. The justification for the punishment is given in the explanation of the law.
Stately 12/6/1/72
KR June 13/72
1576 Mon
Page 356
Page 363
...
Page 363
whichst. I conem in the opisin that branding is a "barbarous, and one which should not be unted to care under exceptional Circumstances. I cannot but feel that such exceptimit cricumstances Ae exist in the present milane. Hong Eng is as se R Medunia observes beraged to hardened & depraved cerminals of sather thing. identification of Chinamon by photograph with I thich be defluist
hand in a prominent place would be mencinta chuth & consi Busare detectia in the event of gettoon to the Colossy, the brutalized
const be successfully, Fusted save boy nattu pilt whit we ha seventy, and I think that for the protective of Hong Hony this natinin i nespary a should be sanctioned.
the
A
deuling ca
as aremal principle are
Stately 12/6.1/72
I retain
dis like
to branding
and I tente,
*
carefiel
fall into
che er
They
"West aliyed".
of inflicting brutalizing penishmento
I fea
ZX
Zee net 22
brestalig ing
brutalized
The findiges
punishments
that the
res k
"brutalized's
Enfanced
offices who niftrited
etu
Can
or chired sucle
the leve
منا موم کافی ہے
is limited
Further,
ZA
Sitiative
Theyting is such
recepay
me as MRY
to tabe
to peaver
That
Laton
356
it form bene Jarvel of
the
yy
• venieting
Mininals fore
I came therefore prepared to ven
but
very the grown.
J
→
: by
ita
above
Criminal, a
sitec cative.
The
Jau et ine
I hur
Currant
planation
thing
is given
tertid
of threy Hory
K June 13/72
right
1576 Mon
heat
A
way
perple
Privilig
alena
curselves
to t
oluveen ol
Zo
Iden
level
Bret
Ches
Inver
case is pecution
The criminal is himself to give
He co
be
The Jerceps,
and
f
Le
does
the flogging
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.