StongKong
Legislative Conneil, 9th February, 1882
The Hongkong Telegraph
HONGKONG, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1882,
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.
A meeting of the Legislative Council was held yesterday after.ioon. There were present:→→→
His EXCELLENCY the GOVERNOR, Hon. F. SNOWDEN, Acting Chief Justice. Hon. M. S. TONNOCHY, Acting Colonial Secre-
tary.
Hon. E. I. O'MALLEY, Attorney-General. Hon. W. M. DEANE, Acting Colonial Trea-
surer.
Hon. NG CHOY.
Hon. F. BULKELEY JOHNSON. Hon. E. R. BELILIOS.
THE TRAMWAYS BILL.
The Council resumed the consideration in Committee of the Tramways Bill.
On clause 129 and following clauses, giving a right of appeal from the decision, regarding the compensation to be given for land taken by the Conipany, of arbitrators and umpires to the Go- vernor in Council, the ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved their rejection. He said the other clauses relating to land were taken from the English Lands Act, but, as he understood, these sections constituted a new tribunal and they were, he believed entirely original. They purported to cast on the Governor in Council duties which were, as he would submit, not altogether con- sistent with the position that the Governor and Council occupied in the system of this colony. They made them a court of appeal from a court of first instance which was constituted by other clauses of the Bill, and brought the decisions of that tribunal into conflict, possibly, with those of the courts of arbitration constituted by the Or- dinance. He submitted an appeal was hardly a proper proceeding in regard to matters of this kind. He took it that many of those who might be affected by the taking of lands would be poor people, and people in whose interest it was that the tribunals should be as complete and efficient as possible in the first in the first instance, and if the tribunal appointed by this Bill, the court of arbitrators and umpries, was sufficient, he would certainly suggest there was no necessity for an appeal to another tribunal of another character. If it was not satisfactory he submitted some tri- bunal should he provided able to deal with the matter in the first instance, and that litigation in the first instance should be as summary as pos sible. Therefore, upon the general ground that an appeal was undersirable and upon the particu- lar ground that the tribunal selected was an in- appropriate tribunal for its purpose be moved the rejection of these clauses.
The ACTING COLONIAL SECRETARY said that one of the points brought forward by the At- torney-General as a reason for the rejection of the clause was one which he considered the strongest point in favour of retaining it, and that was with regard to people who were poor. It a great many cases the Ordinance would deal with Chi- nese, poor Chinese, and he thought it would be difficult for a poor Chinaman to get any one to act as arbitrator for him who would be able to cope with any arbitrator the Com- pany appointed, and therefore it would very soon found the arbitration would be given against him. He therefore thought an appeal should be given to the only power in the Colony that would cost him nothing to appeal to, that was, the Governor in Council. The provision in the Bill with regard to taking property was al- most new in the Colony. At present it was only exercised by the Government, and they knew that among the Chinese the word "Government" had an all powerful signification, and if it was their lives that were at stake they would sur- render to it, but when they came to surrender property to a company whose operations were conducted for quasi-public purposes it was a different thing. The tramway was not a neces- sity at present; they would be able to see what people would say in the future.
He
thought that in the present state of the Colony this section of the Ordinance enacted a very wise. provision in allowed the cheapest and quickest mode of appeal in a case of this sort, and especially for poor people. As he had already said, it would be very difficult for a poor China- man, without paying a large amount of money, to get any one but some one like himself, to act as arbitrator on his behalf. It was not without great consideration on the part of the Govern ment that this section was brought to the notice of the promoters, and he was sure they themselves received it in a very good spirit; they saw the necessity of it and inserted it. It did not inter- fere with any of the courts. He would be the last to speak in its favour if it interfered with the action of the supreme Court, but it did not; it said that if the parties should be dissatisfied with the award of any arbitrator or umpire not court, they might appeal, etc.
The ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE said he might perhaps be allowed to say a few words upon this really very important subject. It was one that engaged his attention very much when the mat- ter was before the select Committee and he had considered it a good deal. He for one would prefer to see the arbitrator clauses altogether removed from the Bill. He had some experience of arbitration when he was at the bar in England, and his experience was that it caused great ex- pense and delay. He would prefer that all pro- ceedings should take place in the Supreme Court on the summary Jurisdiction side. The process there was very inexpensive, there was very little delay, and he thought these questions could be better dealt with there than anywhere else. In that case the observations of his hon. friend the Acting Colonial Secretary would hardly apply, because in those cases the court would deal with property under the value of $1,000, and they could hardly imagine poor Chinaman possessed of greater property than that. If the provi- sion as to arbitration were retained, con-
sidering the position of the Colony and the few people with special knowledge of the subject, he would prefer to retain this clause and give an appeal to the Governor of Council. If, on the other hand, any change could be made, he would prefer to see all these matters left to the Supreme Court, but if the clauses regarding arbitration were to remain he must vote for the retention of these sections, which certainly as his hon. and learned friend said, constituted a new tribunal, but he thought nothing but good could result from it.
Hon. F. B. JOHNSON said he could under- stand the objection of his hon. friend the Attorney- General, but as far as he was concerned, in charge of the Bill, when that Bill was drawn and his Excellency the Governor promised to give it his support, it was under the condition these clauses should be inserted, and under the circumstances he felt bound to retain the clauses.
"His EXCELLENCY-Gentlemen, as a matter of fact, what the Colonial secretary told you is correct, that this, which is a Government clause, was not inserted without most careful considera- tion by the Government. I entirely agree in what he said and what has fallen from the Chairman of the Committee on the subject, and also from the hon. gentleman who is the promoter of the Bill. There is no doubt what- ever that in a community like this, when you have such a large number of Chinese in- habitants, and where the Chinese are such large holders of property, it is very desirable indeed a clause of this kind should exist, and the Govern- ment carefully considered it before it was in- serted in the Bill. As the only opponent of the Government in this matter is the Attorney-General, and as it is a very unusual course for an official member to take, I am bound to say that the Bill, having come from the committee, where it was most carefully considered, and where this clause was unani- mously approved, was then referred by my instruction to the Attorney-General for his re- port and observations. Those observations I considered, and in those observations there was no reference to this. The question was again considered by my advisers, the whole scope of the Bill as sent to us, and it is only now, without notice, that an official member of the Govern- ment opposes that which is the Government part of the measure. I am glad that every member of Council present supports the committee and supports the Government in this clause. Un- doubtedly it would have faciliated the work of the committee, and we might have avoided this
392
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.