567532-1929-Supplementary-Draft-Bill---Offences-against-the-Person-Amendment — Page 2

14

713

سعيد

the transaction was bona fide and solely for the purpose of a proposed marriage, or adoption, in accordance with Chinese custom.

(2) Every person shall be deemed to be guilty of an offence against this section who without lawful authority or excuse harbours or has in his possession, custody or control any minor under the age of eighteen years, if any person has, within or without the Colony, purported to transfer or confer the possession, custody or control, wholly or partly, of such minor for valuable consideration after the day of

•

1929.

(3) It shall be lawful for a magistrate to find the age of any minor brought before him with respect to whom an offence against this section is alleged, whether evidence of age be given or not.

(4) It shall be no defence to a charge under this section that the minor consented to the transaction, or that the minor received the consideration or any part thereof, or that the accused believed or had reasonable ground to believe that the minor was not under the age of eighteen years.

(5) Every person who is guilty of an offence against this section shall upon summary con- viction be liable to a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars and to imprisonment for any term not exceeding one year.

(6) Nothing in this section shall be con- strued as recognising in any way whatsoever the possibility that rights of possession, cus- tody or control over any person can be trans- ferred or conferred for valuable consideration for any purpose.

(7) No prosecution under this section shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney General: Provided that such con- sent shall not be necessary for the arrest of any person suspected of having ommitted an offence against this section.

Objects and Reasons.

1. Section 45 of the Offences against the Person Ordi- nance. 1865, Ordinance No. 2 of 1865, makes it an offence to take away a child under fourteen, by force or fraud, with intent to deprive any parent, guardian, or other person having the lawful care or charge of the child or of the possession of such child. In cases where a mui tsai has been enticed away from her employer, and where the authorities have been satisfied that the motive of the kidnapper was not a benevolent one but the desire of gain, the prosecution have sometimes been met by the argument that the section does not apply because the mistress of a mui tsai cannot be considered as having the lawful care or charge of the child. The Government has been advised that this argument is not sound, and that, though the employer of a mui tsai has no right whatever of retaining possession of the girl as against the girl's parents or as against the girl herself, yet her care and charge of the child is not unlawful and may be treated as a lawful care and charge for the purpose of proceeding against the kidnapper. Unfortunately, so far as is known, no decision has ever been given by the courts on the above argument, because the case has always gone off on some other ground. No apprehension is felt by the Government that the courts would hold the above defence to be a good one, but there appears to be an impression abroad that the defence is a good one, and some officers