CO129-614-5 Protected Places (Safety) Ordinance 1946- proposed revision 26-9-1946 - 15-1-1948 — Page 31

capital being made out of the existence of this

measure, especially in the event of Chinese nationals

sabjoots being wounded or killed as the result

of the use of the exceptional powers granted by it.

For these reasons. 4.

In theey grownetando I should prefer

to see the Ordinance repealed as soon as possible.

If, however, you consider that there is a very

definite risk of conditions deteriorating to what

finit

it

they were when the Griinanec was enacted, I should

not wish to offer any objection to its retention

for a further six months, as you propose. In that should not be able to apee to th event, however, I d

171 30 ndgcible to

take stops to ronday ther retention beyond

that period, without further review.

5.

however,

If you consider that, while there is,

no such risk at the moment, there is a definite

possibility of a recurrence, at some time in the

future, of the state of affairs which led to the

Ordinance, I should have ne si j9etion enactment of the measure

enabling

the introduction of an amending Bill

to to suspend and by proclamation the operation of the Ordinance while retaining

power to bring it into force again by proclamation,

should this prove to be necessary. If this is

would no down?? done, Leo siler Set the opportunity should be

taken to modify Section 4(1)(b)(i) in the light

of the comments in my secret despatch No.245 of the

28th November, 1946.

Som

comments

M

ho

I should glad

din maggestion.

I have, etc.,

incorr

31

[ this follows

Lording

in

M.

hoparis.brray's

Munte 24/60)

(which

wowed to mach immediatich the Scill becomes law)