calculation as
fir a kennedy sende home
as to the length of their voyages to Singapore
2. In respect to so A. Kennedy's remark in Desp : W. 144. that the Messageries Maritimes when they clear for Shanghai or Saigon do not come under the Emigration Laws, & much point out that although Saigon is not mentioned in his Excellency's proclamation of Jan 7 1856 fixing the length of voyages (there having been no passenger traffic between Hongkong and Saigon at that time) Saigon is included in Schedule A. of the Hongkong Ordinance No:8. of 1871. Sect 4 of that Ordinance declares the voyages specified in schedule A. (which includes Saigon) to be voyages of less than 30 days duration. While sect 5 provides that the regulations &c. shall cease to be in force in respect to Ships to which the Ordinance applies, and in lieu thereof the regulations contained in schedule B. of the Ordinance would apply to them. The regulations in Schedule B. and those to which I alluded as prescribing conditions in respect to survey, inspection &c. differing but little from the conditions of the "Imperial Act" & to these regulations the French Mercantile Marine must submit, unless the Local Ordinance is to be altered for their benefit.
HUM24/2
then
T.O.
in paragraph 207 n mmala 39
1. Sir A. Kennedy says that pending the receipt of instructions he does not propose to revoke the declaration that Singapore is more than 7 days' voyage from Hongkong. The E.C.H. in paragraph 10 of the foregoing despatches the opinion that it ought not to be revoked and I presume Sir A.K. should be so instructed.
2. With reference to Sir A. Kennedy's despatch No. 144 in which he says, with regard to the Messageries Maritimes, that voyages between Hongkong and either Shanghai or Saigon are not subject to restriction the E.C.H. points out that voyages between Hongkong and Saigon are subject to the Ordinance No 8 of 1871, Hongkong being included amongst the starting places and Saigon amongst the destinations in Schedule A. of the Ordinance.
I had overlooked this but to me it seems contrary to the intention of that Ordinance that it should be so and to conflict with other Ordinances.
The object of Ordinance No 8 of 1871 appears to have been to modify the restrictions to which vessels proceeding on voyages of not more than ... were subject...
Page ...
The final output is formatted according to the rules, with corrections made to spelling, spacing, and some reordering for clarity while maintaining the original content and tone. File references are formatted correctly without spaces inside parentheses. The text is presented in HTML format using `` for paragraphs.
calculation as
fir a kennedy sende home
as to the length of their voyages to Singapore
2. In respect to so A. Kennedyje) remark in Deep : W. 144. that the Mefingering Maritimer Werte when they clear for Shanghar Saigon not come unter the Emigration Laws, & much point out that although Saigon is not mentioned in his J. Lowrings broclamation of Jaw 7 1856 fusing the length of royager (there having teed no passenger traffic between Stonphong and [regon at that time ) Sargon is included in Schedule A. of the Hongkong Ordinance M:8. of 1871. leur 4 of that Ordinance declares the voyages epecified in schedule St. (which includes Saigon ) to be voyages of left than 30 days duration. While cante 5 providee that the regulations & the Chinese dapengert Ach re, shall cease to be in force in respect to Shipe to which the Ordinance applies, and in live there of the regulations contained ne schedule 3 of the Ordinance would apply to them. The regulations in Schedule B. and Hhose to which I alluded as presssiting conditions in respect to surrey, inflection re, differing but little
from the conditions of the "simperial Ach & to these regulations the the Engerie Masilimare must submits, unlah. the Local Ordinance is to be altered for benefit.
a
HUM24/2
then
T.O.
лю
in paragraphe 207 n mmala
39
1. Sir A. Kennedy says that pending the receipt of matructions he does not propose to revoke the declaration That Singapore is more than 7 dage
voyage from Houghong. The E.CH in paragraph 10f the poregoining
capres the opinion thal it ought not to be revoked and Ipresen
muiate
Sir A.TC. should he so istoricted
2. With reference to Sir A. He's despite
W. 144 in which he says,
with
regard to
the Messageries Maritime, that voyage. benson Houghong and wither Shanghai or Saigon are not subject to restriction the E.CT! point out that voyages
Haughong and Sacjon
modified restrictions
betores
are
of
eubject to the ordmance 8
amongsh
If 1971, Houghany being included the starting places and Saigon amongst to destinations in Schedule A. ordinance.
it scence.
I tal
7
Shad overlooked this but to me the contrary to the intention of that ordinance that it should be so you add to conflich with
other ordinances.
8 of
The object of oxclinan 1871 appears to have been to modify the restrictions to which we felles proceding
then sodays the
Eaz
A
case
voyages of not more than restrictions to which such vessels were subjects
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.