office has paid attention to colonial business, thus speaks of Dr. Eitel-"I must say that Hongkong is to be congratulated on the possession of Dr. Eitel. I know nothing more of him than what I find in the official papers. He is a man of enlarged mind, well acquainted with Chinese customs, and desirous of acting in harmony with them, and of improving them where possible, and I entreat the Secretary of State to give the utmost attention to his recommendations." I may add to that strong opinion the interesting fact that Dr. Eitel's wife and children are British subjects and that now, by the Ordinance we hope to pass to-day, we will make him a British subject within this colony.
The CHIEF JUSTICE-I cannot help feeling, sir, looking at this paper which you have produced, that it was in antagonism to myself that Lord Stanley spoke, and although he did so speak of Dr. Eitel and though he has thought it to charge me with wild exaggeration in what I have said in this colony. I quite agree with what he says as to Dr. Eitel's general talents and ability, because I think it is due that I, who am as it were pitted by Lord Stanley against him, should say so in justice to Dr. Eitel. At the same time, you know, no one can know better than yourself, that the language which Lord Stanley has thought fit to adopt with regard to myself in the House of Lords has pained me excessively, and has been, I think, the result not of his own calm judgment but of the inspiration of the mandarins in London.
His EXCELLENCY-Well, gentlemen, in putting the question I will only say I was very glad to hear from my hon. and learned friend the Chief Justice his hearty concurrence in Lord Stanley's comments on Dr. Eitel. As matters have been mentioned by his Honour the Chief Justice, I may say this, that I believe there is no Chief Justice in any of Her Majesty's colonies who is less deserving of the charge, if it be a charge, that the report is supposed to make against his Honour, than my hon. friend. I know very well the Chief Justice of this Colony, many years ago, long before I came here, was subjected to far severer criticisms, and criticisms in this Colony; and upon a somewhat similar subject, and I know very well that with respect to the coolie trade it was the opinion of every Secretary of State, and the opinion expressed both in Parliament and here, by those who really studied the subject and expressed impartial opinions, that no man had done better service than the Chief Justice, Sir John Smale.
Gentlemen, I now move the second reading of this Bill.
The Bill then passed the second reading, was committed, and passed.
CHINAMEN NOT TO BE FLOGGED FOR REFUSING TO PUT OUT FIRES.
His EXCELLENCY-Now, gentlemen, there is another short Bill entitled, “An Ordinance enacted by the Governor of Hongkong, with the advice of the Legislative Council thereof, to amend Ordinance 9 of 1857." The fact is that there came before me certain papers with respect to the Fire Brigade, in which I know two of my non-official friends take great interest, and in going into the question I had to consider the subject of the Volunteer Fire Brigades in the Colony and I found we had very admirable ones. Some of them were composed exclusively of Chinese and on looking at the rules I found a reference to Section 8 of Ordinance 9 of 1857, and that made a distinction. I think a very invidious and improper distinction, as to Chinese, so I put it in the hands of my hon. friend the Attorney-General to draft this very short clause. Section 8 of Ordinance 9 of 1857 is hereby amended by striking out the words "or (if such Justice shall think fit and the offender shall be a Chinaman) of not more than fifteen blows nor less than five blows."
Well, I myself had the misfortune to see a very large fire in this Colony, and I think I might appeal to my hon. friends to say that in no place could you see the native community conduct themselves better than the Chinese did on that occasion. A member of Parliament who happened to be passing through at the time, remarked to me that the conduct of the Chinese during the great fire of 1878 was a model of good conduct, and he thought it would be highly creditable to the inhabitants of any city in England if they conducted themselves as well under similar circumstances. Under these circumstances, looking to what the Chinese do for us as Volunteers in extinguishing fires, and for other reasons which I need not particularise, I move the second reading of this Ordinance.
The Bill was read a second time, committed, and passed.
THE FRENCH MAIL STEAMERS.
His EXCELLENCY moved the second reading of a Bill to make temporary provision for securing the status of the French mail steamers within the ports of the colony of Hongkong. He said the Attorney-General had already mentioned the circumstances under which this Ordinance became necessary; every member of Council was familiar with them, and the Ordinance as it stood was in accordance with instructions from the Secretary of State.
The Bill was read a second time and the Council went into committee upon it.
On the third clause, which provided that the Ordinance should continue in force until a date which required filling up,
The CHIEF JUSTICE suggested that the date might be determined by the Governor.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said there might be reasons why the law should be suspended and he thought it would be more satisfactory the question should be dealt with by the Legislative Council by way of a repealing clause than that the question whether it should be suspended or not should be left in the hands of the Executive. The words "1st September, 1881," were then inserted.
Hon. W. KESWICK asked if it would be necessary to pass the Bill every year.
His EXCELLENCY-Unless action is taken sooner at home, which is contemplated.
The CHIEF JUSTICE-It is a very serious interference with the rights of all private individuals.
The Bill then passed through Committee.
His EXCELLENCY-Gentlemen, the Bill has passed through Committee, and in making the motion that it now do pass I will only say, in order to prevent all misunderstanding, you are aware a judgment was given by my learned friend the Chief Justice on this subject, and though I am not a legal authority I will venture to say I consider it a very able judgment, and though it was my duty on that occasion to instruct the Attorney-General to appear and take the course he did and support the treaty, I entirely concur in the judgment of the Chief Justice.
The CHIEF JUSTICE-May I say one word on that subject, that I as entirely concur in the action of the Executive, if I may venture to say so.
The Bill then passed.
THE APPROPRIATION BILL FOR 1881.
His EXCELLENCY-Now, gentlemen, we have got through a good deal of our formal work and we now come to our estimates for next year. I beg to move the second reading of a Bill entitled "An Ordinance enacted by the Governor of Hongkong, with the advice of the Legislative Council thereof, to apply a sum not exceeding $447,454 to the public service of the year 1881." Assuming the second reading will pass, you can then go into committee upon the Bill. You can do that in my absence as Finance Committee and Committee on the Bill, and then you will proceed to deal with the various items, hon. members having the opportunity of moving to cut down
Page 378
office has paid attention to colonial business, thus speaks of Dr. Eitel-"I must say that Hongkong is to be congratulated on the possession of Dr. Eitel. I know nothing more of him than what I find in the officisl papers. He is a man of en- larged mind, well acquainted with Chinese cas- toms, and desirous of acting in harmony with them, and of improving them where possible, and I entreat the Secretary of State to give the ut- most attention to his recommendations." I may add to that strong opinion the interesting fact that Dr. Eitel's wife and children are British subjects and that now, by the Ordinance we hope to pass to-day, we will make him a British subject wilbin this colony.
The CHIEF JUSTICE-I cannot help feeling, sir, looking at this paper which you have pro- duced, that it was in antagonism to myself that Lord Stanley spoke, and although he did so speak of Dr. Eitel and though he has thought it to charge me with wild exaggeration in what I have said in this colony. I quite agree with what he says as to Dr. Bitel's general talents and ability, because I think it is due that I, who am as it were pitted by Lord Stanley against him, should say so in justice to Dr. Eitel. At the same time, you know, no one can know better than yourself, that the language which Lord Stanley has thought fit to adopt with regard to myself in the House of Lords has pained me excessively, and has been, I think, the rosult not of his own calm judgment bat of the inspiration of the mandarins in London. His EXCELLENOY-Well, gentlemen, in put- ting the question I will only say I was very glad to hear from my hon. and learned friend the Chief Justice his hearty concurrenos in Lord Stanley's comments ou Dr. Eitel. As matters have been mentioned by his Honour the Chief Justice, I may say this, that I believe there is no Chief Justice in any of Her Majesty's colonies who is less deserving of the charge, if it be a charge, that the report, is supposed to make against his Honour, than my hon. friend. I know very well the Chief Justice of this Colony, many years ago, long before I came here, was subjected to far severer criticisms, and eritivisms in this Colony; and upon a somewhat similar subject, and I know very well that with respect to the ooolie trade it was the opinion of every Secretary of State, and the opinion expressait both in Parliament and here, by those who really studied the subject and expressed impartial opinions, that no man had done letter service than the | Chief Justice, Sir John Smale, Gentlemen, I
now move the second reading of this Bill,
The Bill then passed the second reading, was committed, and passed.
CHINAMEN NOT TO BE FLOGGED FOR REFUSING
TO PUT OUT FIRES.
His EXCELLENCY-Now, gentlemen, there is is another short Bill entitled, “An Ordinance annoted by the Governor of Hongkong, with the advice of the Legislative Cancil thereof, to amend Ordin- ance 9 of 1857." The fact is that there came before me certain papers with respect to the Fire Brigade, in which I know two of my non-official friends take great interest, and in going into the question I had to consider the subject of the Volunteer Fire Brigades in the Colony and I found we had very admirable ones. Some of them were composed exclusively of Chinese and on look- ing at the rules I found a reference to Section 8 of Ordinance 9 of 1857, and that made a distinc- tion. I think a vry invidious and improper dis- tination, as to Chinese, so I put it in the hands of my hon. friend the Attorney-General to draft this very short olanse Section 8 of Ordinance 9 of 1857 is bersby amended by striking out the words or (if such Justice shall think fit and the offen. der shall be a Chinaman) of not more than fifteen! blows nor less than five blows." " Well, I myself
had the misfortune to see a very large fire in this Colony, and I think I might appeal to my hơn. friends to say that in no place could you see the native community conduct themselves botter than the Chinese did on that occasion. A member of Parliament who happened to be passing through at the time, remarked to me that the conduct of the Chinese during the great fire of 1978 was a model of good conduct, and he thought it would be highly areditable to the inhabitants of any city in England if they conducted themselves as well under similar circumstances. Under these cir. cumstances, looking to what the Chinese do for us as Volunteers in exti guishing fires, and for other reasons which I need not particularise, I move the second reading of this Ordinance.
The Bill was read a second time, committed, and passed.
THE FRENCH MAIL STEAMERS. His EXELLENCY moved the second reading of a Bill to make temporary provision for securing the status of the French mail steamers within the ports of the colony of Hongkong. He said the Attorney-General had already mentioned the eircumstances under which this Ordinancebooame necessary; every member of Council was familiar with thein, and the Orilinance as it stood was in accordance with instructions from the Secretary of State.
The Bill was read a second time and the Council went into committee upon it.
On the third clause, which provided that the Ordinance should continue in force until a date which required filling up,
The CHIEF JUSTICE suggested that the date might be determined by the Governor.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said there might be reasons why the law should be suspended and he thought it would be more satisfactory the question should be dealt with by the Legislative Council by way of a repealing clause than that the question whether it should be suspended or not should be left in the hands of the Executive. The words 1st September, 1881," were then inserted.
Hon. W. KESWICK asked if it would be neces. sary to pass the Bill every year.
His EXCELLENCY-Unless action is taken sooner at home, which is contemplated.
The CHIEF JUSTICE-It is a very serious inter- ference with the rights of all private individuals.
The Bill then passed through Committee.
His EXCELLENCY-Gentlemen, the Bill has passed through Committee, and in making the motion that it now do pass I will only say, in order to prevout all misunderstanding, you are aware a judgment was given by my learned friend the Chief Justice on this subject, and though I am not a legal authority I will venture to say I consider it a very ablo judgment, and thongh it was my duty on that occasion to instruct the Attorney-General to appear and take the course he did and support the treaty. I entirely concur in the judgment of the Chief Justice.
The CHIEF JUSTICE-May I to say one word on that subject, that I as entirely concur in the setion of the Executive, if I many venture to say so.
The Bill then passed.
THE APPROPRIATION BILL FOR 1881. His EXCELLENOT-Now, gentlemen, we have got through a good deal of our formal work and I we now conie to our estimates for next year. beg to move the second reading of a Bill entitled "An Ordinance enacted by the Governor of Hongkong, with the advice of the Legislative Council thereof, to apply a sum not exceeding $447,454 to the public service of the year 1881.* Assaming the second reading will pass, you can then go into committee upon the Bill. You can do that in my absence as Finance Committee and Committee on the Bill, and then you will proceed to deal with the various items, hon. members having the opportunity of moving to cut down
378
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.