CO129-539-3 Mui Tsai system 8-2-1932 - 10-1-1933 — Page 30

No.58.

92612

Y 33

GOVERNMEnt hoUSE,

HONG KONG, 16th February, 1932.

Sir,

(89) on

82759/31

I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch No.321 of the 4th December, 1931, on the subject of the prosecution of Chau Ming.

2.

The matter has again been referred to the Attorney General who points out that offences against section 45A of the Uffences against the Person Ordinance No.1 of 1865 (as enacted by section 3 of Ordinance No.13 of 1929) are punishable on summary conviction and do not appear to be indictable.

Under section 21 of the Magistrates Ordinance No.3 of 1890 in the case of an offence other than an indictable offence where no time is limited by any ordinance or statute for making any complaint or laying any information in respect of such offence, such complaint must be made or such information laid within six months from the time when the matter of such complaint or information respectively arose. (Compare 11 and 12 Vict. c.43 s.11). In spite of the maxim nullum tempus occurrit regi this limitation is considered as a bar to a Crown prosecution. (Archbold 28th Ed. p.60; Broom's Maxims 9th Ed. p.46; and 19 Halsbury pp.175 and 591).

3.

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE

SIR P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER, G.B.E., M.C., M.P.,

&C.,

&c.,

&c.

Page 30Page 31