CO129-246 - Acting Governor Fleming - 1890 [8-9] — Page 187

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

Especially if they have children. Ad abroad & their children seem to have the full rights of the children of the wife, but the broad difference remains that the concubine is simply bought and may be sold, and the 2nd wives mainly kept, while the wife is not saleable, at least among respectable people, once she is married.

Bigamy at Penang does not help much. Reports of trial (num?) in Penang Gazette of (date?) & (date?) as the judge did not admit the validity as evidence of the Chinese Law Books, tendered by the Prosecution, and holding that the onus of proof was on the Prosecution, directed the Jury to return a verdict of not guilty.

It is to be noticed that S.4?? of the Straits Penal Code, under which the Penang Trial was raised, seems to be worded so as to allow bigamy where that practice is permitted by the peculiar laws of a man's religion; but it seems to me that s. 52 of Ord. 4 of 1865 prohibits bigamy in every case, except where the former marriage was contracted outside the Colony by an alien, and there is no law (e.g., Hindu or Muhammadan law) which permits plurality of wives.

I take it, therefore, that part of the section of this new Ordinance to read along with s.52 Ord. 4 of 1865 can only mean that carnal connection with a concubine (or 2nd wife) under the age of 16 is a misdemeanour.

If the section is left as it stands, it will not be in the S. of State's (or anyone else's) power to give a declaration (as this Patatine asks) that persons who take concubines under 16 years of age shall not be law-breakers - nor do I think we can give any assurance that it is not the intention of the Government to prosecute persons for taking concubines under that age.

On the whole, I think there is no sufficient reason to alter this section, and that there is little hardship in making the Chinese select somewhat older concubines. (It will be only a matter of a year or so, as they are not often taken below 15.) Sir ... Russell told me just before he left England that he thought it would not be a grave hardship.

Edit History

2026-05-26 09:29:46 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
Especially if they have children. Ad abroad & their children seem to have the full rights of the children of the wife, but the broad difference remains that the concubine is simply bought and may be sold, and the 2nd wives mainly kept, while the wife is not saleable, at least among respectable people, once she is married. Bigamy at Penang does not help much. Reports of trial (num?) in Penang Gazette of (date?) & (date?) as the judge did not admit the validity as evidence of the Chinese Law Books, tendered by the Prosecution, and holding that the onus of proof was on the Prosecution, directed the Jury to return a verdict of not guilty. It is to be noticed that S.4?? of the Straits Penal Code, under which the Penang Trial was raised, seems to be worded so as to allow bigamy where that practice is permitted by the peculiar laws of a man's religion; but it seems to me that s. 52 of Ord. 4 of 1865 prohibits bigamy in every case, except where the former marriage was contracted outside the Colony by an alien, and there is no law (e.g., Hindu or Muhammadan law) which permits plurality of wives. I take it, therefore, that part of the section of this new Ordinance to read along with s.52 Ord. 4 of 1865 can only mean that carnal connection with a concubine (or 2nd wife) under the age of 16 is a misdemeanour. If the section is left as it stands, it will not be in the S. of State's (or anyone else's) power to give a declaration (as this Patatine asks) that persons who take concubines under 16 years of age shall not be law-breakers - nor do I think we can give any assurance that it is not the intention of the Government to prosecute persons for taking concubines under that age. On the whole, I think there is no sufficient reason to alter this section, and that there is little hardship in making the Chinese select somewhat older concubines. (It will be only a matter of a year or so, as they are not often taken below 15.) Sir ... Russell told me just before he left England that he thought it would not be a grave hardship.
Baseline (Original)
Especially if they have children Ad Babroad & their children seem to have the full rights of the children Hi Hain of the wife, but the broad difference spsschung. remains that the concubine is Simply bought and may be sold Sand the 2 4th wives manly kun while the wife is not a saleable are marri at least among again, when once she is marrici beingi respectable tan der t a different Cam Bigame at Penang does not help custom at gether" /HE Daih Press, much face Reports of Irial num) in Panang Gazette of lamp. & 19 any.) as the judge did not admit the validit as widence of the Chinese Law Books, tendered by the Prosecution and holding wan an that the of proof the Prosecution, directed the Jury to retum a verdict of not guilty- It is to be noticed that S.4gh of the Straits Penal Code, Penary Trial was a which the 5 raised, seems be worded so as to allow bigamy Stoke this 4.err tical Indian Pend where that practice is permitted code experi by the peculiar laws of notes that it a man's religion; Loves us the but it seems to me that s. 52 of. Haughing apply tha Ord. 49 1865 prohibits bigamy in wery Usxcept case A en there the team marringer contracted gitside the Colony by an alien, I there is no Hunda Muhamm man Funce Hann laut permits pluralit loopholeption in favour of quives A any polygamous peoples - whether Muhammedans Chines 185 I take it, therefor to then has the that part from and alstrare of the section of this new Htting Ord to read along with 1.52 Ord. 4 of 1865 can only that carnal connection with concubine (or 2nd wife) under the ap & if ther 16 in misdemeanours, OL section is left as it stands, it will not be in the S. of State's (or any an clear Else's) power to give declaration (as this Patatine asker, that persons who take concubines under 16 years of age shall not be law breakers - nor do I think absolute we can give There is nothipers that a Apresent thes thing one if it, Exprich Esh assurance that it is not then intention f the fovernment to prosecute person for taking cmcubines under that age. On the whole I think there to alter is no sufficient this section verz & that there in little hardship in making the Chinese select somewhat older concubines. (It lee 5 be only a matter of a year or so, taken are not often since they below 15.) Sie ). Russell told me just before he left England that The thought it would not be a grave winter great hardshich
2026-05-26 09:29:46 · Baseline
View content

Especially if they

have

children

Ad Babroad & their children seem to have the full rights of the children

Hi Hain

of the wife, but the broad difference spsschung.

remains that the concubine is

Simply bought and may

be sold

Sand the 2 4th wives manly kun

while the wife is not a saleable are marri at least among

again,

when once she is marrici

beingi

respectable

tan der

t

a

different

Cam Bigame at Penang does not

help

custom at gether" /HE Daih Press,

much face Reports of Irial num)

in Panang Gazette of lamp. & 19 any.) as the judge did not admit the validit as widence of the Chinese Law Books, tendered by the Prosecution

and

holding

wan an

that the

of proof

the Prosecution, directed the

Jury to retum a verdict of not guilty-

It is to be noticed that S.4gh of the Straits Penal Code,

Penary Trial was

a

which the

5

raised, seems

be worded so as to allow bigamy

Stoke

this

4.err

tical

Indian Pend

where that practice is permitted code experi

by the peculiar laws of

notes that it

a man's religion;

Loves us the

but it seems to me that s. 52 of. Haughing apply tha

Ord. 49 1865 prohibits bigamy in

wery

Usxcept

case

A

en there the team marringer

contracted gitside the Colony by an alien,

I there is no

Hunda

Muhamm

man

Funce

Hann laut

permits pluralit

loopholeption in favour of quives

A

any polygamous peoples - whether

Muhammedans

Chines 185 I take it, therefor to then has the that part from and

alstrare

of the section of this new Htting Ord to read along with 1.52 Ord. 4 of 1865 can only

that carnal connection with

concubine (or 2nd wife) under the ap

& if ther 16 in misdemeanours,

OL

section is left as it stands, it will not be in the S. of State's (or any an

clear

Else's) power to give

declaration (as this Patatine asker,

that persons who take concubines under 16 years of age

shall not

be law breakers - nor do I think absolute

we can give

There is nothipers that a

Apresent thes thing one if it,

Exprich Esh

assurance that it is not then

intention

f

the fovernment to prosecute person for taking cmcubines under that age.

On the whole I think there to alter

is no

sufficient

this section

verz

& that there in

little hardship in making the Chinese select somewhat older concubines. (It

lee 5

be only

a matter of a year or so, taken are not often since they below 15.) Sie ). Russell told me just before he left England that The thought it would not be a grave winter great hardshich

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.