360
| Guptastbar 156, 1017.J CAN SLAVERY EXIST UNDER THE BRITISH FLAG?
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
For instance, in Egypt, which until this i war broke out was a semi-independent State under the suzerainty of Turkey, a blow was dealt at the system, which is (Daily Press, August 25th, 1917.)
sanctioned by Mahommedan law, by the Owing to the jury not being satisfied Egyptian and British Governments for Convention signed in 1877 between the that the facts were proved in the kid bidding the slave-trade in Egyptian terri napping case at the Criminal dessions on tory and empowering any slave to claim Thursday, there will, unfortunately, be his or her liberty by making application no necessity to decide the very interest to the Bureaux of Manumission, which ing and important legal point which was raised for the
were specially created for the purpoet. A defence. The charge fresh stimulus was given to the movement against the prisoner was that he "unlaw by the British Occupation, and a House fully, by fraud” enticed away two little for freed slaves was established at Cairo, Line servant girls, under the age of partly by money subscribed in England fourteen years, from the custody of their under the auspices of the Anti-Slavery Mr. G. G. ALABASTER, Who Society. In the Bondan, where we are in froded, argued that the indictment rld not stand because the lawfulness of waged against slave-traders, and the a stronger position. constant warfare is the custody was an essential ingredient source of supply to Egypt is thus being
in the offence, and these children were ing in a state of slavery, which could ut be recognised in a British Colony. They had been bought for $100 and $140
pectively, they received DO
pt clothes and food-in return for their work, and their mistresses claimed the right to sell them again,
es not constitute slavery we should If this to know what does. The CHIEF Jus replied that this mes a Chinese ption, and, when the British took posses- of Hongkong, Capt. ELLIOTT, the Buperintendent of Trade, issued a pro- clination in which the Chinese were mid free exercise of all their re Faciuns rites, ceremonies, and social cu-toras. English law held only so far
it did not conflict with the expressed contention, and it may
r given by such proclamations. In if bigamy, for instance, the Court ays took the question of custom into videration, HT ALABASTER, however, intained that, though the sale of dilen might be perfectly legal in Thina. nobody could be kept in Hong kong in a state of slavery. Directly u Have came to this Colony he (or she) had
that, although the practice of itamolating cut off. If we turn to India.. we and Hindu widows on the funeral pyren of their dead husbands had been enshrined centuries and had acquired the sanctity wages in Hindu opinion by the authority of of a religious rite, this did not prevent resolution in Council in 1829, in the face Lord WILLIAM BENTICA from carrying a of most strenuous opposition, declaring that all who abetted sattro were guilty of over, has been made, so far as we are "culpable homicide." No attempt, how.
of bigamy, or even polygamy, amonget Aware, to check by legislation the practice native races whose religious custome sanction it. The precedents, therefore, appear to support Mr. ALABASTER'B be doubted
would have been treated with so much Captain ELLIOTT'S proclamation respect if the subject had presented fewer difficulties
A VICTORY FOR LIBERTY.
(Daily Press, August 27th, 1917.)
right to freedom He pointed out hat the very first Ordinance passed by the la! Legislature of the Colony related to slavery and had reference to the public have received the announcement It is with general satisfaction that the Close more than to any other nationali. . but the Ordinance was dishllowed on
that the Secretary of State for the : ground that the Imperial 'statutes permanent character of the Military!
Colonies has upheld the objection to the Jar the abolition of slavery extended by Service Bill, and that the local Govern- their own proper force and authority to ment will, accordingly, introduce an Hongkong. Dr. ErTEL, in his well-known amendment limiting the operation of the history, suggests that this pretext for measure to the duration of the war and lowing the Ordinance WJs (six months afterwards, All those concern- fiction, put forward only to glossed may, we think, be congratulated upon p the defeat of the Government in upting to meddle with Chinese ons. quoation which has already aroused very this smooth and speedy settlement of a Nevartheissa, it is a fact that considerable feeling and threatened to net for the abolition of slavery culminate in a public protest. It will be brghout the British Colonies W&B
d in 1833, and Parliament voted time-limit was the first of the criticisms remembered that the omission of any millions sterling for the promotion which we offered against the Bill as 8000 industry among the manumitted as it was submitted to the Legislative t
ENTING
C
+
(
E
and for the compensation of Council. persons hitherto entitled to their then as due to an oversight, but, upon We regarded the omission 7:09 It is evident, tro, that
ELLIOTT'S proclamation
the matter being raised on the second viewed in the same light by the
was reading, it was immediately made evident
■'oficial, a few years after it was Although it is quite possible that the
that the omission Was intentional. 1 as it has been since Nearly fort later Chief Justice SMALE de if it had been passed in this form. we measure would not have been disallowed pr 1 as slavery the system of purchas
adversely criticised the Government definitely raised, the Imperial Authori were convinced that, onec the issue was For adopting girls for employment, ties would never countenance it, for a for their failure to enforce the very important question of principle wa on the subject. Eventually the involved. In the circumstances, to have was discussed in the House of sanctioned compulsory military service bat without any result.
universally understood that placed the British Ministry in an extreme- It in. for all time in Hongkong would have Ter is not tolerated under the British ly embarrassing position. Their action
and the policy of the British Govern. would have been regarded as has been to suppress it wherever it showing which way the wind blew, and
■ straw the necessary authority and to dis would have exposed them to the charge Tags it wherever it had any influence of secretly favouring militarium while
31
:
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.