CO129-548-15 Sand Ordinance 1934 23-11-1934 - 12-9-1935 — Page 3

3

C

The circular despatch to which

Mr. Roberts-Wray refers is that of the

21st May, 1934, (31519/34 General).

The present Ordinance in Hong Kong

relates to the creation of a Government sand

monopoly. The only other monopoly in Hong

Kong is the opium monopoly, and in the opium

legislation there are similar clauses placing

the onus of proof in certain circumstances on

persons accused of offences against the

monopoly.

It seems to me that such clauses,

which are introduced for the defence of a

Government monopoly, are in a different

category to the sort of measures deprecated

in the circular despatch - see, for instance,

paragraph 3 of the despatch, "There is serious

objection to extending the principle to cover

all kinds of property"; it is not possible to

suggest that the Government of Hong Kong is

by this Ordinance extending the principle to

all kinds of property, but only to the very

particular case of a Government monopoly.

Moreover, the Ordinance leaves it

to be proved by the prosecution that the sand

alleged to be in the possession of an accused

person is, in fact, sand as defined in Section 2

of the Ordinance, and it is only after the

prosecution has stood this test that the onus

passes to the accused person to show that his

possession of the sand was covered by the

necessary permit or other authority under the

Ordinance.

But