W. Bramston
Straits
12022
In last par. of ... seems to simply this desp" the fw. that the only amendment required is to turn "Misdemeanour." into "felony" & change into Felony.
No: he means that it is not worth while to legislate in order to amend in 1.45 of Ord. 4 of 1865, but are a criminal which is already ...
Should I think, to prevent any mistake, point out that it will be necessary to enact words to make ss.44 & 45 clearly applicable to "wives as at present the words "unlawfully" in those sections (at least presumptively) implies and has been interpreted in England that carnal knowledge with a married wife is not forbidden when ...
When minuting 17273/900 to point out that the words in s. 6 of Ord. 11 of 1890 ought rather to say "not married to him" as it stands, the act when committed with another man's wife is not made any offence, as surely it ought to be?
Should we suggest this amendment now?
The proposed amendment of s.45 of Ord. 4 of 1865 should be accompanied by a similar amendment to include "attempt to have carnal knowledge" in s.6 of Ord.11/1890.
The amendment proposed in s.6 of the Ordinance of 1890 seems dutiful. If this girl is already a wife, the act resolves itself into simple adultery.
It is the deliberate policy of this country not to make adultery penal, for the reasons stated by Mr. Justice Stephen, that it is the business of a husband to pain and retain the affections of his wife, and the breach of this duty weakens his moral fibre and leads to bad behaviour towards her.
19.6.71
(This has been waiting in accordance with minute Straits 72022).
Now see further on 12022 and proceed as proposed above? and thenfrige?
At same time suggest that the ...
See alw
W. Bramston
Straits
12022
In last par. of
seems
to simply
this desp" the fw.
that the only
No: he means th it is not worth while
amendment required is to turn to legislate in orde
"Misdemeanour.
"
into "felony
in 1.45 of Ord. 4 of 1865, but are
"
& change into Felony.
a crimi
which is already
Should I think, to prevent any mistake, fishermanor point out that it will be necessary Bejeans final
to enact words to make ss.44 145
clearly
"
Servitude chang
at such cows cen
Jonly abmchoma in
Free years.
of that Ord. applicable to "wives asat present the words "unlawfully
in those sections (at least presumptives) wiplies and hasp
England
been to interpreted
Z
that camal knowledge
nselse Canfally?
with a
married wife
44
Somitted
married
not
is not forbidden
When minuting 17273/900 to point out that the wor in s. 6 of Ord. 11 of 1890 Sufficiently ought rather
"
narrow
suice,
say
The clause
hot married.
to him
as it stands, the act when committed with another man's wife is not made any offence, us surely it anglat to be?"
Should we
suggest thin
amendment now
Iment of 01.44
The proposed amend
I see now thrat 146
1865 should be
445 of ord. 4 of 1865
71865
gordi of accompanied by a
1865 deals with attempts
Sugar
AM
amendment
to include "attempt to have
carnal knowledge of Ord. 110/1890
"
in 0.6
255
S.W. 9.19 Jane)
The amendment of proposed in down 6 of ther
Ardinanc of 1890 senors dutiful. If this girl is already
A with, the art resolen itself into simple adsulting,
Arnd
کر
it
is the delimate policy of this countly
Not to make adrelting penal, fo the rearmilated
of a
by hr. protice Stephen, that it is the bermich on
Mastound to pain and retain the affectionsophis wise, and theath to land line the and of the pouch Card weakens his motin fu food behavious
würde her.
557
19.6.71
(This has been waiting
accordance with mainte Straits
72022
Now see further
). Now
on 12022 + proceed as proposed above? and thenfrige
? At same time suggest that the
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.