CO129-551-5 Asylums Amendment Ordinance 1935 24-1-1935 - 29-5-1935 — Page 8

8

2 Bushe,

As the reference to ther HO. was

at your suggestion, you may

made

like to see

their refly

the oft. g

ther desp. which

it is moored to send the Governor

the outcome of

on correspondence with them.

Have you any

further observations ?

جيعه

21/5/35

Thanks.

910 bous

thr

"D

Noted

Knu

hitrares 57/6/35

Ift. marker for issue

4 So #. King.

An Gand

Te mode

Hoted

AIDA

#. Kong.205

+

VS. 2315735- at mak

205 (and)

273

If we be refpiciens if

سلا

مله مسعد

уна

interestin Is this came

yes wyshimi 2116

-29 MAY 1935

1.

whi be

•

2116

Page

офи

23

C. O.

Page

Mr. Costar

7.5.35

Mx Dr.O'Brien 18/5

5.35

Mr. Dale

20.5

5.35

Mr.Gent 20

5.35

Sir C. Parkinson.

Cowell 21

Sir G. Tomlinson.

Sir C. Bottomley.

Sir J. Shuckburgh.

x

Permt. U.S. of S.

23/57357

Parly. U.S. of S.

Secretary of State.

DRAFT. conson.

Sir,

HONG KONG

53513/35/Hong Kong.

4

9

age 9

Downing Street,

29 May, 1935.

NO. 205

GOVERNOR

To H.0. 1.4.35

(2)

✓

+35

Fr. H.0. 29.4.35

(3)

FURTHER ACTION.

(1)

I have etc. to acknowledge

Sir William Peels

receipt of your despatch No.57 of the

29th January, 1935, forwarding for the

signification of His Majesty's pleasure

copies of Ordinance(No.1 of 1935 the

Asylums Amendment Ordinance and to inform

you that His Majesty will not be advised

to exercise his powers of disallowance

in respect of the Ordinance.

2.

I enclose copies of correspondence

with the Home Office in connection with

the terms of the amending Ordinance. It

will be observed that two points in con-

nection with the Ordinance were referred

to the Home Office for advice. First,

it was

was questioned

whether

age 9

Page

Page

10

whether untried prisoners who have been

certified by the Medical Officer of the

prison to be of unsound mind should be

removed to an asylum without first being

brought up for trial in the ordinary way,

and if unfit to plead then sent to the

asylum by the Judge. It will be

observed that the Home Office explain

under

the law of

that imfæet in this country powers some –

what analagous to those taken in Hong Kong

by the Ordinance under consideration do in fact

exist, in law in this country, although

in practice they do not appear to be

exercised except in cases of extreme

on uu Keac

urgency.

yoounds,

In these circumstances I would

suggest for your consideration that the

of removal of centmed prisonins

powers in this respect taken by Ordinance

No.1 of 1935 should also (only be exercised

in cases of extreme urgency on medical

grounds.

3. A second point which was referred

to the Home Office concerned the power

conferred by Ordinance No.1 of 1935 to

transfer

ge 10

ge 10Page 11

C. O.