CO129-519-11 Protection of Women and Girls Amendment Ordinance- 1929 1-11-1929 - 1-11-1929 — Page 14

15

omission of the old section 23 of Ordinance No. 19 of

1889. In the amending Ordinance of 1891, however,

Ordinance No. 14 of 1891, it appeared in a very different

form from the old form. Section 4 of Ordinance No. 14

of 1891 does not contain a word about the interests of the

girl or about any application for a writ of habeas corpus

nor does it contain any provision for the exercise of any

discretion by the Registrar General. It lays down baldly

that no parent who has voluntarily parted with a girl

between six and sixteen for the purpose of adoption into

another family, or who has received money for parting with

the custody of the girl for any other purpose, shall be

deemed to be entitled as of right to the custody of the

girl. The surprising thing is that this new section

was definitely put forward as intended to deal with the

"evil" known as flying the white pigeon. This is a well

known form of fraud in which a woman or girl is ostensibly

"sold", generally for purposes of marriage, and in which

the woman or girl runs back to her fellow conspirator

after the purchase money has been paid.

Not a word was

said in the Legislative Council about the omission from

the old form of the section which I have referred to above.

The section was repeated in the same form in the

consolidating Protection of Women and Girls Ordinance,

1897, Ordinance No. 4 of 1897, and the Objects and Reasons

contained the following surprising paragraph :-

"Section 24 (the section in question)

"is a reproduction of Ordinance 14 of 1891,

"section 4, and prevents parents, after

"selling their children and spending the

"money, from claiming them back even when

"adopted by the purchaser".