allows these vessels to carry only about one half the number they would be licensed to carry under Board of Trade certificate in this country.
On the similar representations from the Peninsular & Oriental and the Messageries Maritimes I had to make concessions between July 1872 & July 1873, the 19 Oct. and later reports of which I give in the margin; and what I said then can only repeat. "First 24 Feby. 122 March? 126 July a Passenger's ... the det cannot take notice ditione under which men Emigrate, but only of their position in life and power to protect themselves. home of the Emigrants from this country emigrate under contract, nor can it be said that they are now at least generally of the lowest Class - But no one, I suppose, would therefore say that a passenger Law was unnecessary for their protection."
Second. I have no doubt the Company's Vessels are well built & make expeditious passages. None can be better built or make more rapid passages than Steamers plying between this Country & America which all come under the Passengers Act. Besides the Law cannot be made to apply to only one out of several competing proprietors. If the Steamers of this Company between HongKong & Melbourne were exempted from the special provisions of the 623 ordinance, how could any other Steamers that were put on the line be refused a similar exemption? A total exemption could not be granted without an Act of Parliament as the Chinese Passengers Act 1855 (18 & 19 Vic. c.104) while it allows Legislature to vary the Hongkong regulations by the Act, doesn't allow ships altogether from Regulation.
Third. the allegation that the enforcement of the Law causes delays & inconvenience is a matter of course. It was stoutly alleged in this Country when it was decided in 1863 to bring Mail Steamers under the Passengers Act. It has been found, however, in practice that no delay or inconvenience need arise. It was even more strongly insisted upon by the Peninsular & Oriental and the Messageries Maritimes Companies. We have however heard nothing since they have seen that the Law would not be altered in their favour. And I have no doubt the present applicants will equally find their apprehensions unfounded if they loyally accept the provisions.
allows these rappels to carry only about one half the number they would be liccused to carry under Board of Fade (ertificate in this country. -
On the similar representations from the beninsular & Privatal & the Mapageries Maritimes 18? I had to make clubral
میں
6 between Inly / 1872 & duly
20. July 187
9. Jardy, 187
Later
reports
of
/1973, the 19.Oct.
which
I give
محمد
M
in the margin; rat what I said then - Firsh 24.Faby.
can only reprat
a Papingers"
the
122. March?
126 July
det cannot take notice ditione under which men Emigrate, but only of
their position in life and power to protect themselves. home of the Emigrants from this fountre sipate under contrach_ nor can it be sack that they are now at leastygenerally of the lowest Class - But no one, I suppose, " would therefore say that a papenger Law was unnecesary for their protration - Second. I have no doubt the Companied
Vessels are well built & make exped plupages.
can be better buil or make more rapid papages teamers plying between this Country &
but no
перев
thom the
America which all come under the
Papengers Act - Besides the Law cannot be made wapply to only one out of repels. oprapets- If thes
Steamers of this Company belükeen
HongKong
* Melbourne were of
Exsmpled
from the spential provisions of the 623
ordinance,
how could
amy
Sther Seamous
the
that were put on the line be refused a cimilar exemptions ? A total exemption could not be granted without an Act of Parliament as the Chinese dapingere Act 1855 (18.0 19. Vic. c.104.) while it allows
Legislatiore to vary the Hongkong regulations by the Act, docenst allowil tobe romph papenpert ships altogether from Regulation - Thind the that the enforcement of the Law cancer delays
allegation
&
x inconvenience is a matter
course. It was stoutly alleged in this Country oshen it was decided in 1063 to Passenger bring Mail Steamere under the Pay Act. It has been found, however, in practice that no delay or
or inconvenisne need arise. It was even more.
ungsultys
the Peninsulow and
Maritmuse
insisted upon My Oriental & the Mesageries Companies. We have however heard aothing
since they have
more
seen that the fair would not be altered.
in their favour. And thave no douth the present applicants will equally
this promi- find them apprehensions unfounded if they lonally accept the
ou
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.