CO129-274 - Public Offices & Others - 1896 — Page 298

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

293

M. Lucas

Before carrying out your instructions on

the previous page

I would call your attention to certain

points.

You will see from Mr Riblett's Memorandum herewith that

the penalties vary from £5 to £200.

Sir F Clarke in para. 2 of

20068189 concurred

in the penalties except that he "thought the St. Helena one

might be reduced. If this is sent to the Colonies it will be taken as an invitation to increase the penalties which presumably is not intended where they are already too high. But you will see from the letter to the WO 12 Feb/91-1907, that the Imperial Act 52 & 53 Vict Cap 52 is in force in all the Colonies and that it

BL(x)−71793-3300---36

held that Colonial Governments could

rely upon the local enactments

so far

as they go and upon

the Imperial Act in so far

as it goes beyond them. My own impression is that all the Colonial laws remain

suspended until the Act or the requisite parts of it

have been suspended by Order

in Council under Sec. 5 of the Act. And it may be a question whether any Colony, or

any penalty fixed by local law, may not inflict any penalty it thinks fit under the Imperial Act which does not limit the amount of the fine.

If the Circular is issued, I think the WO should

suggest the penalty

which they think would be appropriate.

Edit History

2026-05-28 10:30:20 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
293 M. Lucas Before carrying out your instructions on the previous page I would call your attention to certain points. You will see from Mr Riblett's Memorandum herewith that the penalties vary from £5 to £200. Sir F Clarke in para. 2 of 20068189 concurred in the penalties except that he "thought the St. Helena one might be reduced. If this is sent to the Colonies it will be taken as an invitation to increase the penalties which presumably is not intended where they are already too high. But you will see from the letter to the WO 12 Feb/91-1907, that the Imperial Act 52 & 53 Vict Cap 52 is in force in all the Colonies and that it BL(x)−71793-3300---36 held that Colonial Governments could rely upon the local enactments so far as they go and upon the Imperial Act in so far as it goes beyond them. My own impression is that all the Colonial laws remain suspended until the Act or the requisite parts of it have been suspended by Order in Council under Sec. 5 of the Act. And it may be a question whether any Colony, or any penalty fixed by local law, may not inflict any penalty it thinks fit under the Imperial Act which does not limit the amount of the fine. If the Circular is issued, I think the WO should suggest the penalty which they think would be appropriate.
Baseline (Original)
293 M. Lucas Before carrying out your the previous page mistictions on I would call youn altention to certan points You will see from Mr Ribletts Dammary herewith that vary from £5 to £200 the penalties vary from sis and Sir 5 Clarke in para: 2 of 20068189 concurred minute on in the penalties except that he "thought the St. Helena one leve might be reduced. If this is sent to the Colonies it will be taken as an invitation to increase the penalties which presume is not intended where they already to high. But you will see from the letter to the WO 12 Feb /91-1907. that the Imperial Act 52+ 53 Ke Cap 52 is in force in all the Colonies and that it on ) f > BL (x) −71793-3300---36 held that Cal Governments could rely upon the local enactments so for as they go and upon the Imperial Act in so far کرنے مة goes beyond them. my own impression is that all the Colomil laves remain. Imperial Onder suspended until the fict or the requisite parts of it have been suspended by. in Conncil under Sec. 5 of the Acr . and it may be a questio whether any Colony, no any penalty fixed by locals law, may not inflich any penalty it thinks fit under the Imperial lect which does not limit the amount of l the fine to до If the Circular is I think the NO should Suggest the penalty which they think would * wees]
2026-05-28 10:30:20 · Baseline
View content

293

M. Lucas

Before carrying out your

the previous page

mistictions on

I would call youn altention to certan

points

You will see from Mr

Ribletts Dammary herewith that

vary from £5 to £200

the penalties vary from

sis

and Sir 5 Clarke in para: 2 of

20068189 concurred

minute on

in the penalties except that he "thought the St. Helena one

leve

might be reduced. If this is sent to the Colonies it will be taken as an invitation to increase the penalties which presume is not intended where they already to high. But you will see from the letter to the WO 12 Feb /91-1907. that the Imperial Act 52+ 53 Ke Cap 52 is in force in all the Colonies and that it

on

)

f

>

BL (x) −71793-3300---36

held that Cal Governments could

rely upon the local enactments

so for

as

they go and upon

the Imperial Act in so far

کرنے مة

goes beyond them. my own impression is that all the Colomil laves remain.

Imperial

Onder

suspended until the fict or the requisite parts of it

have been suspended by. in Conncil under Sec. 5 of the Acr . and it may be a questio whether any Colony, no

any penalty fixed by locals law, may not inflich any penalty it thinks fit under the Imperial lect which does not limit the amount of l the fine

to

до

If the Circular is I think the NO should

Suggest the penalty

which they think would

*

wees]

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.