CO129-235 - Public Offices - 1887 — Page 388

-

d

1267

385

No. 2072, dated Bombay Castle, 9th May 1897.

From A. SHEWAN, Esq., Acting Under-Secretary to the Government of Bombay,

Judicial Departinent,

To-The Secretary to the Government of India, Home Department.

I AM directed, with reference to your No. of 12th January last, calling for a report as to the working of section 31 of the European Vagrancy Act, 1874, to state, for the information of the Government of India, that the reports on the subject received by His Excellency the Governor in Council show that not only in the mofussil, but also in the Bombay city itself, the provisions of the section referred to have never been enforced.

2. As regards Bombay city, I am to forward herewith copies of the com- munications received from the Chief Presidency Magistrate and the Governor of the Government Workhouse as indicating some of the circumstances which have tended to this result.

No. 17W., dated Bombay, 1st February 1887.

Memo. from CAPTAIN W. P. WALSH, Governor of the Government Workhouse,

Bombay,

To-The Secretary to the Government of Bombay, Judicial Department (through

the President, Committee of Management).

WITH reference to Government Resolution, Judicial Department, No. 469, dated 22nd January 1887, forwarded with Mr. Cooper's docket No. 7, dated 29th idem, the undersigned has the honour to state that, as far as his knowledge extends, the provisions of section 31, Act No. IX of 1874, have never been put in any in force against any person, company, association, or body of persons capacity in Bombay.

2. As regards ex-soldiers, it is not known that any non-commissioned officer or soldier who has become a vagrant had left the army in India under any engagement such as referred to in the section in question.

3. As regards sailors discharged from their ships in Bombay, they either succeed in re-shipping on board some other vessel, or are sent home by the Shipping Master as distressed seamen.

4. As regards "stowaways, or men who have deserted their ships in Bombay, it has not been deemed possible to hold ship-masters or agent liable, inasmuch as such men have not been "discharged"; and, as above stated, the undersigned is not aware that section 31 of the Vagrancy Act has ever been put in force in Bombay.

No. 99, dated Bombay, 4th February 1887.

From-C. P. COOPER, Esq., Chief Presidency Magistrate, and President, Committee of

Management, Government Workhouse,

To-The Acting Under-Secretary to the Government of Bombay, Judicial Department. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of Government Resolution No. 469, dated the 22nd ultimo, and in reply to state that no action to my knowledge has been taken under section 31 of the European Vagrancy Act, 1874, since the Act came into operation.

2. As regards the discharge of seamen at this port, I would draw the attention of Government to section 4 of the Indian Merchant Seamen's Act (XIII of 1876) under which the sanction of the Shipping Master has to be obtained before seamen can be discharged.

3. I forward herewith a memorandum* from Captain Walshe, Governor of the Government Workhouse, on the subject of the Resolution above quoted.

*No. 17W., dated 1st February 1867.

a. C. B. Press, Sicola,-No. 250-IL. B.-25-5-87,-!0,

ver