CO129-402 - Governor Sir May - 1913 [7-8] — Page 227

220

1/-

REPORT

on An Ordinance entitled An Ordinance to amend the Tramvay Ordinance, 1902.

This Ordinance is the final phase of a dispute which

arose some years ago between this Government and The Electric

It will be recalled Traction Company of Hongkong Limited.

that the Government alleged that the electrical operations

of the Company adversely affected the working of the Government

Telephones and an action was brought against the Company by the

Government to recover the cost of alterations to the Telephone

system necessary to counteract interference with the telephonic

communication caused by the electrical operations connected with

the working of the Electric Tramway. In 1910 the matter was pre-

sented to the Court by way of Special case as prescribed under

the provisions of the Tramway Ordinance, 1901, the result of

which was adverse to the Government's claim. An appeal was

contemplated but lengthy negotiations then ensued and eventually

a settlement was arrived at; the appeal being dropped; the Company

paying the Government a sum of money and some alterations being

arranged in the conditions relative to the running of workaen's

cars.

A Alw

arrangement

2/-

The present Ordinance besides embodying semist

relative to the alteration of the previous arrangements as to

workmen's cars includes amendments of the original Ordinance

which seemed indicated by the result of the litigation which

took place.

5/-

4/-

Section 1 of the Ordinance is formal.

it

Section 2 alters Section 21 of the Principal Ordinance, (The Tramway Ordinance, No.10 of 1902). I connection with the

amend ent contained in Section 2 of the present Ordinance

Hu should be pointed out that the reason why decision against the

Λ Government was adverse in the litigation was gbably because

•

บ

it was held that Section 21 only referred to interference with "telegraphic communication and not with that of telephonic communi-

cation. The present amendment proposes to rectify this defect in

the Section by making it clear that the interference referred to

in Section 21 aight refer to interference with telegraphic, tele-

phonic or electric

5/-

communication.

Section 3 of the Ordinance amends Section 23 of the Princi.

pal Ordinance, It was observed in the course of the litigation

that the machinery of a special case was not altogether suited for

the decision of every kind of dispute. The amendment provides that

the ordinary methods of procedure may be adopted in the event of

there being facts in dispute which would make an action in the or-

dinary course more suitable for arriving at a decision in the matter

ô/-

Section 4 amends Section 24 ofthe Principal Ordinance in

manner similar to that in which Section 23 of the Principal Ordi-

nance is amended by Section 3 of the present Ordinance.

7/-

Section 5 of the Ordinance repeals Section 49 of the Prin-

cipal Ordinance and replaces it by a new Sub-section. 8/-

Section 49 of the Principal Ordinance dealt with the pro-

vision of cheap tickets for workanen. The arrangement under this

Section 49 have never been worked very satisfactorily.

The pre-

sent arrangement contained in the new Section 49 provides in Sub-

section(1) that the Company shall in the early morning and late

afternoon carry at the low fare of two cents bonâ fide workmen who

reside outside the City.

لله

Sub-section (2) of the new Section 49 prescribes that only

bona fide workmen show be capable of holding these tickets and

by Sub-section 3 the Company is bound to provide a service

throughout the period during which the workmen's cars are running

adequate for the general public service as well as that for the

workmen.

Under Sub-section (4) the Company is given power to make and

ust make bye-laws defining bona fide workuen, indicating where