but British subjects or Ships in British Port the (British Justices emigrations do not afford the Government any practical assistance.
The Attorney General on the other hand defines the powers of the Hongkong Legislature to prohibit all assistance to the fitting provisioning in Hongkong of ships intended for the Macao Coolie Trade in terms similar to those employed in the draft Ordinance.
Draft
Enclosed in Sir Kennedy's despatch of 22 Jan.
R: 18. I have nothing to add to my minute on that despatch with reference to the Draft Ordinance. But the Attorney Genl. in his memorandum raises some other questions. First he enquires whether the "offences" committed by British subjects in Macao, which by the Order in Council of 6 March 1865 are made cognizable by the Supreme Court of Hongkong, would include acts declared to be offences by the Colonial Legislature. I presume that they would not – but if there is a doubt on the subject at the Colonial Office we would suggest that the question should be referred to the Law Officers of the Crown.
Second. He states that if a Macao Coolie ship put into Hongkong on her voyage with coolies on board, she would be stopped and the coolies landed under the powers contained in the Chinese Passengers Act 1853 and the Local Ordinance No 4 of 1870. I presume that the Attorney General means that a Coolie ship under such circumstances would be held to have commenced her voyage from Hongkong and would thereby become a "Chinese Passenger Ship" as defined in section 1 of the Chinese Passengers Act 1855 and would be required to obtain a licence from the Governor under Ordinance No 4 of 1870. Of this, however, if it is his interpretation of the Law it is inconsistent with the opinion given by the Law Officers in June 1857 that Foreign Passenger Ships bound for Foreign Countries which put into ports in the United Kingdom in transitu would not come within the provisions of the Passengers Act.
Another matter not immediately connected with Hongkong but which ought not to be passed over is raised by the Chief Justice's letter. He encloses two Extracts from the China Mail on the subject of the Emigration from Macao to Singapore from which it appears that the vessels which carry the Emigrants are dangerously overcrowded. One vessel, an American, of only 684 tons had on board 1700 Emigrants. There is no power in Hongkong to prevent this so
but Kritish subjects or Ships in British Bortk the (brief dustices enggrations do not afford. the Government any practical apistänce.
The Attorney General on the otherhand defince the powers of the Stongkong Legislature. to prohibit all apistance to the fitting provisioning in Hongkong of ships intended for the Macas Cortic Trade in terms similars to those Employed in the
a Ordinance.
Draft
Enclosed in sirakennedys despatch of 22 Jau
R: 18. I have nothing to add to my minute on that despatch with reference to the Draft Ordinance. But the Attorney Genl.
in his memorandum caires some other questions. First he enquires whether the "offences".
there is
""committed by British subjects in Macas, which by the Order in Conneil of G. March 1865– are made cognizable by the supreme Court of Stongkong, would include auto declared to be Spruces by the Jolonial Legislatures. The presume that they would not _ but ih
a doubt on the subject at the Colonial Office we would suggest that the question should be referred to the Law Officers of the [rown. ] Second. He states that ip Pracas Coolie ship put into Hongkong on her voyage with police on board, she would be stopped and this footies landed under the powers contained in the thincce Safengers det 1953. and the Local Ordinance $: 4 of 1870. In presume that the Attorney General means
2. cov
7
How
وا
}
62
200
217
that a Cooly, ship under such circumstation
would be held frecømmene håv voyage
from Hongkong and would thereby become "attrinese dassenger Ship"
de 1
defined
1ot section of the Chinese bapenger
on the
Ach 1855. and would be required to obtain a hernee
the Governor under Ordinance dit
from
of 1870. Of this, however, is his interpretation the Law it is inconsistent with the
in this Oficere that Foreign baporngen
of
quinion given by the Law Spices in sume 18507. Country in June
Ships bound for Foreign Borld which puls in to borto in the United Kingdom in transitio would not come within the
provisions of the basengers Hott.
Another matter not immediately connected with Hongkong but which ought not to be passed oven is raised by the thief Sustices letter. He sncloses two Extracts from
Mail the China
the subject
021
of the Emigration from Macão to Singapore from which it appears that the repell which carry the Emigrants dangerously overcrowded. One
Vapol.
are
au Almerican,
the thich ductice says of anly 684 tone had ou bood 1700. Smigrants. There is no power in Hongkong to prevent this so
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.