"These two sets of provisions dealt with practically
"the same acts putting wood, stones, etc., on the "railway, and other kindred matters, but the criminal
"intent in the two statutes was different in the Ma
+
The pro
"cious Damage Act it was damage to the railway, carriag
"etc. ; in the Offences against the Person Act, it was
"damage endangering the safety of passengers. "-visions of the former Act were introduced into the
"Colony by Ordinance No. 10 of 1910; this draft intro-
"-duces those of the latter Act, and like No, 10 of 191
"it is made applicable to tramways.
"I think that now that the New Edition of the Re-
"-rised Laws is being prepared serious omissions in the
*of the Colony should be remedied; in this case the obji
"is to bring the law of the Colony into line with the
"English law on which it is based. Provision is made fl
"introducing both the new sections and those of No. 10.
"of 1910 into their proper position in the Criminal Lar
"Ordinances of 1865.
"Part II of No. 10 of 1910, which deals with a dif
"-ferent matter, will remain as a substantive enactment.
(Signed) J. T. Piggott,
Chief Justice. "
An amendment was inserted in the Council in clause 30A (3) the
words "being in or likely to be in or upon or near to a railway" bein
substituted for "being in or upon a railway". This was done to cover
a recent incident where a man, presumably an inquisitive coolie, moun
-ed a locomotive on the Chinese section of the Kowloon -
Canton Rail
and opened the valves. The engine proceeded and collided with some
trucks killing a Chinaman.
#
The words "or likely to be in or near a railway would meet a pos
-ble contention that the Crown must prove that somebody was in fact
the railway.
WRees Davies.
155
Attorney General.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.