686938-1879-Certificates-of-Policemen-on-their-retirement- — Page 22

556

THE HONGKONG GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 17TH SEPTEMBER, 1879.

The Right Honourable Sir Michael Hicks-Beach,

Bart., M.P., to His Excellency Governor

Pope Hennessy, C.M.G.

右蕃貴批有飭來貴

貴部堂" 批者符合本大臣亦未見有何

蕃祉駢增須至復者

賜

方浴復篇

佩

兼

浴

復

順

燕覆

水師提督御賜佩帶三等寶星 香港等處地方兼理水陸軍務將

DOWNING STREET,

26th June, 1879.

SIR,I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch No. 40, of the 29th of April, on the subject of a correspondence which

has passed between Mr. CREAGH and certain Justices of the Peace relative to the refusal of the former to call a meeting of the Visiting Justices of the Gaol.

I request you will inform Mr. KESWICK and the four other gentlemen, at whose request the matter has been referred to me, that I have not thought it necessary to consult the Law Officers of the Crown respecting the construction to be put on Ordinance No. 4 of 1863, which appears to me to be clear and in accordance with the opinion

given by the Attorney General, nor do I see sufficient grounds for advising any alteration of this Ordinance.

I have the honour to be,

Sir,

Your most obedient humble Servant,

M. E. HICKS-BEACH.

Governor HENNESSY, C.M.G.,

&c.,

&c.,

&e.

一千八百七十九年六月二十六日

國會參議藩政院世襲男爵赫

客覆事現准

士

齊

及

署

有何意本大臣以爲不須轉問 飭該紳希士域及四紳士求將原山轉呈本大臣者均知案癸亥年第四條則例所 來往書函及因該署巡理府未許邀請察獄紳士齊集等因准此合卽客覆煩爲轉 貴部堂四月二十九日第四號交案稱論及署巡理府祁與掌法紳士等所有 大臣蓋本大臣見該則例甚明亦與律正司所

大士

問將

可請

轉有

爲

His Excellency Governor Pope Hennessy, C.M.G., to The Right Honourable

Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, Bart.,

M.P.

[No. 70.]

GOVERNMENT HOUSE, HONGKONG, 29th May, 1879.

SIR, I have the honour to lay before you a letter from the Captain Superintendent of Police, with some minutes thereon, in which Mr. DEANE explains a practice that I have not been able to approve by which a Police Constable on retiring, was to have received a character-roll marked “very good," though within two years previous to his retirement, he had been twice fined for neglect of night duties, one of those fines being for “gross neglect of duty.”

2. This case illustrates what seems to me to have been a defect in the Police Regulations of Hongkong, and one not unlikely to account for some laxity in the performance by the Police of night duties. My attention was drawn to it in the following way:-Mr. DEANE, the Captain Superintendent, wrote to the Colonial Secretary on the 1st instant, asking me to decide whether Police Constable JOHN FREEMAN, who was enlisted in our Police Force ten years ago in Hongkong, and who is now retiring on pension, should receive the three months' pay (as a sort of gratuity in addition to the pension) amounting to $120, being the sum he can receive under section 3 of Ordinance No. 8 of 1869, or whether the greater favour of giving him $250 (payable to Constables enlisted in the United Kingdom) should be allowed to him.