1893-02-08 — Page 1

PRESENT :—

( 68 )

8TH FEBRUARY, 1893.

to raise a special force of Coast Defence Volunteers in

His Excellency the Governor, Sir WILLIAM ROBINSON, K.C.M.G.

Hon. G. T. M. O'BRIEN, C.M.G., Colonial Secretary. Hon. W. M. GOODMAN, Attorney-General. Hon. J. H. STEWART LOCKHART,Registrar-General. Hon. N. G. MITCHELL-INNES, Colonial Treasurer. Hon. F. A. COOPER, Director of Public Works. Hon. R. I. RUMSEY, R.N., Harbour Master. Hon. C. P. CHATER.

Hon. HO KAI.

Hon. T.H.WHITEHEAD.

Hon. E.R.BELILIOS.

Hon. J. J. BELL-IRVING.

Mr. F. H. MAY, Acting Clerk of Councils.

MINUTES.

The minutes of the last meeting were read and confirmed.

PAEERS.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY—I have the honour to lay on the table the report of the Captain Superintendent of Police for the year 1892 and the report of the Superintendent of the Gaol for the same year.

NOTICES OF QUESTIONS—THE MISSING

TREASURY CLERK.

Hon. C. P. CHATER—I beg to give notice that at next meeting of Council I shall ask the following questions:—(1) What is the total amount, so far as has been ascertained to date, of the loss occasioned to the Treasury through the defalcations of A. F. Alves, late clerk and accountant therein? (2) Over what period of time these defalcations extended so far as at present known. (3) Was the defaulter guaranteed in any way, and, if so, how, by whom, and to what amount? (4) When were the defalcations first discovered, and when were any steps taken for the arrest of the defaulter; is it a fact as stated in the newspapers that Alves was allowed time during which he was able to make away with the books and accounts incriminating him and to escape from the Colony?

Hon. T. H. WHITEHEAD—Sir. I beg to give notice that at next meeting of Council I will ask the Honourable the Colonial Secretary the following question: —Will the Government appoint a Commission, composed in the main of persons unconnected with the Government service, to investigate and report publicly on the management of the Treasury department and on the circumstances connected with A. F. Alves defalcations?

THE VOLUNTEER BILL.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Sir, I rise to propose the second reading of a Bill entitled "an Ordinance to provide for the establishment of a Volunteer F o r c e a n d t o e m p o w e r t h e G o v e r n o r

the event of anticipated war." Whatever, sir, may be the slight differences of opinion as to the details of the organisation of a Volunteer force in this colony I have never yet heard it seriously suggested or argued that the organisation and raising of such a force was either impossible or undesirable. We may be at the present time, sir, in a condition of security and of peace, but it is in times of peace and security that proper precautions should be take for the maintenance of that security in times of trouble and danger which may occur at the moment when we least expected their arrival. Hongkong, sir, is a small island and it may well be said that there is only a small number of young men in this colony available for the purposes of a Volunteer force. It may be—nay, it is so—that the personnel of the able men who would be available for such a force is constantly changing in this colony, changing more rapidly probably than in other places, but nevertheless that same manly spirit which is inherent in those who are brought up in Great Britain and Ireland, and other places under the Crown too, does not desert men when they come to live 9,000 or 10,000 miles from the mother country. I feel perfectly confident for my own part that there will be found in the time of need a sufficient body of men who will come forward here and will be perfectly willing to devote a considerable part of their leisure, at some personal inconvenience perhaps, in the desire to receive such training as will render them useful when the time comes for their services to be required. Now, sir, in this colony the first Ordinance relating to Volunteers was passed in the year. 1862—it was Ordinance No 2 of 1862—and it authorised the enrolment of a volunteer force to be called the Hongkong Volunteers. Not until twenty years afterwards, in 1882, was another Ordinance, which was No. 18 of 1882, passed. It was of a very similar character, almost on the same lines as its predecessor which it repealed, and it is that Ordinance of 1882 which at the present moment is in force and which has regulated the Volunteers up to the present time. I have said that in 1862 the first Ordinance on the subject, was passed. I was looking the other day at a history of the Military Forces by Mr. H. Jenkyns, C.B., Assistant Parliamentary Counsel, and this passage, which I will read, occurs in it:— "After the peace of 1814 the foot volunteers fell almost entirely into abeyance, but in 1859, in consequence of a panic respecting the hostile tone of the French Army and Government, and the defenceless state of the country, they were revived chiefly as rifle volunteers but partly as light horse artillery and engineers. The old Act

( 69 )

(1804) was soon found unsuitable for the organisation of the new force, and was replaced by the Act of 1863, which was again amended in 1869 and 1881." Now I only mention that because when the 1862 Ordinance was passed in this colony of course the Act of 1863 was not available as a model and in the Ordinance of 1882 instead of looking at the 1863 Act, which was passed after great care and consideration of the whole subject in England, the framers of that Ordinance looked back only to the Ordinance of 1862 and practically repeated the terms of that Ordinance, with very small variations, in making the Ordinance of 1882, which. as I have said, is the present law regulating the subject. Since that time it is clear that the whole matter requires revision. It is clear that greater powers under a more detailed Act are necessary in order to give proper efficiency to the Volunteers, and it is for the purpose of making the law such as it should be that the present Bill, of which I have the honour to move the second reading, is brought before the Council. This Ordinance recites two things. It says, "Whereas it is expedient to provide for the establishment of a Volunteer Force and that the Governor should be empowered in the event of anticipated war to raise a special force of Coast Defence Volunteers to assist in the service of the sub-marine mine defences or in any measure involving the employment of steamers, launches, boats or other vessels." There are two different bodies you will see—the ordinary Volunteers and the Coast Defence. Volunteers—mentioned in the preamble. Now on looking at the Ordinance it will be noted that the Ordinance does not itself create any Volunteer Corps. It only enables the Governor to enrol and create such Volunteer Corps and it regulates the organisation and discipline of the corps when it is created. The first five parts of the Ordinance deal with the ordinary Volunteer corps. The sixth part might have been made the subject of a separate Ordinance. It is headed "Coast Defence Volunteers" and it deals with the subject of coast defence. It assumes that those employed may have to go on the water and in that respect they differ from the Volunteers who undertake to serve only upon the land in Hongkong. The duties of such a Corps would not be of course confined to the shore and it may be necessary therefore to introduce a few words—which I am prepared to do when we go into Committee—in Section 33 emphasising that difference between the Coast Defence Volunteers and the Ordinary Land Volunteers. Now turning to the general provisions of the Ordinance, I may point out that the first part deals with the organisation of the Volunteer corps; the second part deals with actual military service; the third part with discipline; the fourth with rules and property of the corps; and the fifth with miscellaneous matters. L o o k i n g a l i t t l e m o r e c l o s e l y i n t o

the details of these separate parts dealing with the organisation of the Volunteer corps it will be observed, first, that it is lawful for the Governor to accept the services of any persons desiring to be formed under this Ordinance into a Volunteer Corps and offering their services and on such acceptance being notified in the Gazette the proposed corps shall be deemed lawfully formed under this Ordinance. I only wish to point out that this does not go into any details as to the constitution of the corps. It simply gives the Governor power to raise a corps and the details may be the subject of subsequent and independent consideration. I ought not to omit a tribute to the present Corps which has bravely kept up the Volunteer movement without perhaps all the encouragement they deserved Section 5 provides for commissions to be issued to officers by the Governor, and section 6 provides how a Volunteer may quit the Corps. It will be observed that in the third sub-section of section 6 there is a provision which looks on the face of it a little inconsistent with the first two sub-sections. It has been the subject of some consideration and I may state that I inserted the clause because although it was provided that Volunteers could in ordinary course leave the corps on 14 days' notice, it was thought that it would be better to have the corps which would be composed of men who specially agreed to serve for some particular period of time—say two years; the details of that would have been fixed by regulations similar perhaps to those which are in the Singapore Ordinance, which this Ordinance in many respects closely follows— but it was represented to your Excellency that some man might not like to engage for so long a period as two years and that it would be best to leave this sub-section out altogether. I am authorised by your Excellency to state, and I shall mention it again when we reach the Committee stage—that sub-section 3 of section 6, which provides for a specified period of service, will be left out so that Volunteers will be free to leave at 14 days' notice; and will not be called up-on to engage for a special period such as is alluded to, though not defined, in sub-section 3. Then section 7, deals with Volunteers when they are on actual military duty. It is provided in the first instance that they are to be under the command of their own officers, but the section makes exception to this under certain circumstances and defines when they are to be under the command of the officers of the regular forces. There appears to be some little difficulty in the construction of that section and therefore I propose to make a slight alteration when we come to Committee. It will then read as follows: —"Whenever any Volunteers are on actual military service or are undergoing drill exercise or inspection together with Her Majesty's regular forces or are voluntarily doing any duty with s u c h f o r c e s t h e y a n d t h e i r o f f i c e r s

( 70 )

shall, subject to regulation under this Ordinance be under the command of the officers of Her Majesty's regular forces, so nevertheless that the Volunteers shall, when the circumstances of the service admit, be led by their own officers under such command." Therefore it is clear that it will only be when they are working with the regular forces that they will be liable to be under the command of officers of the Army. Then Section 8 provides for an annual inspection. Section 9 provides regulations to be made by the Governor in Council as to the requisites of efficiency. Section 10 for the disbanding of the corps, Section 11 for the assembling of Courts of Enquiry, and Section 12 provides power for the Governor to make regulations for the government of the Volunteer Force. These regulations must not be confused with the rules I shall deal with presently as to the internal management and the property of the corps, but these are to be general regulations made by the Governor in Council, and I should like to point out with regard to this that there are the same, or similar provisions in the Imperial Act. You will find if you look at the Volunteer Act of 1863, the Imperial Act, and refer to sections 11 and 16, similar provisions to those here introduced. Therefore we have a precedent in the Imperial Act for the making of regulations on subjects of this kind. I may add that in the Straits Settlements precisely the same provision obtains in the Volunteer Act which was passed in 1888. I now pass to the second part of the Ordinance, which deals with actual military service, and without going into details that might weary you I may state in general terms that it puts Volunteers very much on the footing of regulars in cases where they are called out for actual military service. It imposes upon them liabilities which they would not have as ordinary Volunteers in time of peace—it imposes those liabilities of necessity if they are to be of any use. Having imposed those liabilities it gives privileges which those who are in the regular service enjoy under like circumstances. There are privileges as to rates of pay and allowances, and conditions of quartering and billeting, and there are provisions for families who are unable to support themselves while the corps is called out to active service. There is also provision for pensions for those who should happen to be wounded or be incapacitated by illness in the service of their country. Those regulations will, I think, meet with the approval of all present here. For those who are called upon to help us in time of need it is only right we should make some provision suitable for the circumstances of the case. Passing to Part 3, which deals with discipline, it will be at once obvious that there must be two classes of cases to which discipline must be applied; the first is where men are actually on military service, the second is in the case of men who are not actually upon

military service. There less stringent discipline is requisite. Section 17 proceeds. "With respect to the discipline of officers and Volunteers while they are not on actual military service or undergoing drill, exercise, training, or inspection together with or voluntarily doing any duty together with Her Majesty's regular forces or any part thereof." Then follow provisions. Officers have certain powers to dismiss a man who is not considered to be a credit to his corps and if the commanding officer's decision is not satisfactory to the man there is power of appeal given. Then Section 18 is with respect to the discipline of officers and Volunteers of the force while they are on military service and on them is imposed the liability of the Imperial Army Act of 1881, and its amendments. The Section lays down two saving clauses, one of which is that no officer or Volunteer shall for any offence against such Act or Acts be subject to the penalty of death and secondly, that no sentence of a Court Martial for the trial of an officer or Volunteer shall be carried into execution unless confirmed by the Governor. Sub-section 2 of Section 18 says. "Nothing in this section contained shall be deemed to limit or derogate from the power given by section one hundred and seventy-seven of the said Imperial Act to the General Officer Commanding Her Majesty's forces with which the corps is serving of making such exceptions or modifications as in the same section are referred to" That section 177 of the Imperial Act provides that the general officer commanding may make, if necessary certain exceptions and modifications by his general order. That is necessary because sometimes the boundary line—if I may so call it—of the local Ordinance is not exactly coincident with the scope of the Army Act. There may be some case going between the two spheres which may require some modification and exception to suit the circumstances of the colony and to prevent any deficiencies in the Imperial and the local law. The fourth part of the Ordinance deals with the rules and property of the Corps. These rules, as I said before, must not be confused with the regulation which the Governor in Council is empowered to make. These are rules that the Volunteer Corps dealing with their own property and finances make among themselves, and they can make such rules as they think fit. They are sent through the Commanding Officer to the Governor. They are to be sent first to the Commanding Officer in order that he may know what the rules are, and that his experience may. if necessary suggest some modification if required. Section 20 vests the property of the Corps in the Commanding Officer. That is really more to satisfy legal requirements than anything else. Section 21 deals with the Volunteers who have failed to give up their arms. clothing, &c., and provides a penalty, and then section 22 provides for the recovery of subscriptions and fines. Part

( 71 )

5 of the Ordinance deals with miscellaneous matters. It provides for the recovery of those fines or penalties which may accrue under the rules and it is provided that they be recovered in a summary way before a Magistrate. To prevent the Commanding Officer having to go before the Magistrate himself Section 24 says that any member of the corps authorised by him in writing may appear for him. Section 25 deals with the storage of gunpowder and explosives. I recollect some time ago that the question was raised whether the stores of the Volunteers were stored in their proper place. It was necessary that there should be some sort of regulation, therefore, although we exempt gunpowder and explosives belonging to the Corps from the ordinary law regulating the keeping of such explosives. I propose to add a few words to the section, which will then read, "The provisions of any Ordinance for the time being in force relating to the storage of gunpowder or explosives shall not apply to gunpowder or explosives belonging to any Corps established or raised under this Ordinance. But such gunpowder and exposives shall only be stored in such place or places and subject to such regulations as may be approved by the Governor." Section 26 I may pass over. Section 27 deals with the oath of allegiance. I shall propose when we reach the Committee stage to add an alternative form of declaration so that those who do not wish to take the oath may make the statutory declaration. Then passing to Part 6, the question may arise as to whether it is necessary to wait for the immediate outbreak of war before the Volunteer corps should be raised. At the first blush it would appear that we ought to raise our corps sooner, because with an immediate outbreak of war it would be rather late in the day to begin raising our corps and efficiency might suffer very much by due precaution not having been taken sooner. I may state as regards this part of the Ordinance that there was an Act prepared at home by the Colonial Defence Committee, which was sent to the Colonial Office by the War Office. They forwarded it here as a sort of model and although we are not bound by it, when I drafted the Ordinance I did it in this way because it was so drafted by the Defence Committee at home. I think that will be for your Excellency to decide. It may be desirable that greater power should be given to the Governor and that he should have the authority to create the corps sooner than in actual prospect of an immediate outbreak of war. The only other Section I need call attention to is Section 33. That applies to the Coast Defence Volunteers, general regulations as far as applicable and so on. It will be necessary when we are in Committee on the Bill to add a word or two there because the land forces are essentially intended

to serve on the land and it might look as though these provisions, that is up to Part 6, might prevent the Coast Defence Corps going on the water. Therefore I should suggest the insertion of a few words which will make the section read like this:— "The provisions of Parts I. to V. of this Ordinance so far as they are not inconsistent with the foregoing provisions of Part VI. of this Ordinance, and with service in the waters of Hongkong or the waters adjacent thereto, shall apply to the Coast Defence Volunteers, as if they were a Volunteer Corps established under the said provisions in Parts I. to V. of this Ordinance, and the Coast Defence Volunteers shall, for the purposes of such parts of this Ordinance; be deemed to be on actual military service from the date of their enrolment." I have gone now, sir, as fully as I can, I think, into the details of this Ordinance and I have now the honour to move the second reading. Any objections to the details may be properly brought up in Committee, but I think the Council will be unanimous that a corps should be formed and, as a preliminary to that, that an Ordinance should be passed to give His Excellency the power to create a very efficient force.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.

Bill-read a second time.

The Council went into Committe on the Bill. Upon Section 6, giving power to a Volunteer to quit the corps on conditions.

Hon. E. R. BELILIOS said—Might I suggest that on giving the Commanding Officer 7 days' notice instead of 14 a Volunteer may quit the corps. I think 14 days is too long. I would move that the notice be 7 days.

Hon. T.H.WHITEHEAD seconded.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—The 14 days is taken from the Straits Ordinance. I think myself that 7 days would be rather a short time. The Straits Ordinance provides for such an emergency as a person leaving the colony temporarily or through sickness, and our regulations when they are made would no doubt provide for similar circumstances. When anyone leaves the corps it is necessary that an officer should investigate the condition of the uniform and the state of the rifle and arms and so forth to see that they are in proper order. To make the notice only 7 days would give very little time to get them together and look into the matter. I do not suppose there would be any great difficulty, but 14 days, I may say, is the rule in the Straits Settlements and I have not had any representation made to me by anyone to the effect that 14 days is too long a notice to have to give.

Hon. E. R. BELILIOS—The circumstances of the colony are somewhat peculiar. A young man in a hong might be called away to go to a coast port.

HIS EXCELLENCY—Due provision will be made for that in the regulations.

( 72 )

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—The regulations cannot be made until the Ordinance is passed. I have no doubt that they will then be very carefully made.

HIS EXCELLENCY—Do you wish to proceed with it, Mr. Belilios?

Hon. E.R.BELILIOS—No, I do not wish to press it. HIS EXCELLENCY—We shall make provision for such a case as a young man being suddenly called away, in the regulations.

Hon. E.R.BELILIOS withdrew his amendment. Sub-section 3 of Section 6, providing for a fixed term of service, was struck out.

On Section 8, providing for an annual inspection of the Volunteer Corps.

The HARBOUR MASTER said—As we may possibly raise a coast defence corps it might be desirable to add to the words "by a General or Field Officer of Her Majesty's Army" the words "or any other officer who may be requested." I have not spoken to any one on the subject.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Might we say "Or in the case of the Coast Defence Volunteers by the Senior Officer of Her Majesty's Navy here or any officer requested by His Excellency?"

Hon. T. H. WHITEHEAD—In section 3 it says: —"In this Ordinance unless the context otherwise requires—'Commanding Officer of a Corps' means the officer or other member of the corps who holds the highest rank in such corps. 'Officer' means a person holding a commission as officer in a Volunteer Corps. 'Volunteer' means a member of a Volunteer Corps not being an officer, &c." It seems to me that this definition excludes officers. It might be desirable that officers should be included.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—It is very desirable that it should be put in a way that is perfectly clear. But "member" of the corps means both officers and Volunteers.

Hon. T. H.WHITEHEAD—It appears to me that there is some doubt about it and that the language is not as clear as it might be. I would therefore suggest that the clause should read, "Every Officer and Volunteer shall, &c."

HIS EXCELLENCY—We will say "officer or any member of the Corps," then.

Several small verbal alterations mentioned en passant in the Attorney-General's opening speech were made without any discussion.

Upon Section 25.

Hon. T. H. WHITEHEAD said—So far as I can see from this Ordinance Volunteers are not exempted from the Act which renders it necessary to have a licence to carry arms.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—I have not looked at the Arms Act but I should think they are exempted. It is quite clear, I think, that the intention is that no licence is required. A Volunteer can of course carry his rifle.

Hon. T.H.WHITEHEAD—It only occurred to me just now that trouble might arise if due provision has not been made.

HIS EXCELLENCY—There is no such clause in the Ordinance of 1882.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (after consulting the Arms Act) —Section 5 of Ordinance 17 of 1891 says, "No person who has not a licence from the Governor in Council for the purpose shall carry any arms in this colony; provided that this prohibition shall not apply to any persons in the Naval and Military or Civil Services, &c." I presume the Volunteers would be considered in the Military Service of the Crown. The Arms Ordinance would not apply to a Volunteer.

Upon Section 27.

Hon. T. H. WHITEHEAD said—I should suggest that the words "member of a Volunteer Corps" should read "every officer and Volunteer." As it stands at present I think it is not quite clear, upon the reading of the definitions in Section 3.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—I have no objection to alter the word. The definitions in Section 3 show an officer to be a man holding a commission and a Volunteer as a member of the corps who does not hold a commission. Every officer is of necessity a member of the corps and a Volunteer is merely defined as a member not having a commission. I do not think there is the slightest doubt about it.

On Section 30, which provided that the period of engagement of the Coast Defence Volunteers should be two months.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said—If we leave it like that the force will automatically dissolve at the end of two months. I suggest that the word "two" be altered to "six." Suggestion agreed to.

Reverting to the point raised on Section 8, as to the annual inspection.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY said—With reference to the suggestion made by the hon, member (the Harbour Master) for the addition of words to provide for the inspection of the Coast Defence Corps I would point out that they are only to be called out when there is a prospect of an outbreak of war, and to use the words "there shall be an annual inspection" I think would be a little inconvenient.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—We might add the words, "This section shall not apply to the Coast Defence Corps under Part 6."

The HARBOUR MASTER—There is another question arising. Apparently the Coast Defence Volunteers will be dissolved after six months, so they cannot very well come up for annual inspection.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—I would propose the addition of the words, "It is provided that this section shall not apply to the Coast Defence Volunteers under Part 6 of this Ordinance."

The Council then resumed, the Bill being reported with amendments.

( 73 )

THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—I have the honour to move the second reading of a Bill entitled "an Ordinance to amend the Hongkong Code of Civil Procedure." I do not think that it will be necessary for me to say much in introducing this measure to the attention of the Council on the second reading. I have stated at the end of the Bill the objects and reasons. The present law is regulated by a section of the Hongkong Code of Civil Procedure passed in 1873. In this Colony they have experienced a good many difficulties in connection with the old section, and in England, too, they found a good many difficulties, which led to a new set of rules which dealt very fully with the subject, coming into operation on the 1st July, 1891. It was suggested by a member of the profession and approved of by the Judges, with whom I had the pleasure of discussing this measure, that the embodiment of those rules in our Act here would be a great improvement. I have had marginal notes added since the Bill was last before the Council and they will facilitate members in seeing the meaning of the different clauses, which are of a purely technical character. The first deals with the disclosure of partners names. The next provides that where a firm sues a declaration of partners' names is to be made. The other clauses deal with service, appearance of partners, execution of judgment against a firm, attachment of debts, etc. If and when these alterations are embodied in our Act our law will be on a par with the English law and we shall have a great deal less difficulty in finding out the names of partners in hongs and firms than we have at the present time. I beg to propose the second reading.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.

Bill read a second time. The Council then went-into Committee on the Bill, and no alterations being made the Bill was then read a third time and passed.

THE PIERS AND WHARVES COMPENSATION BILL. HIS EXCELLENCY—The Attorney-General, I believe, has a statement to make with regard to the further postponement of this Bill.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—I have formally to move the second reading of the Bill, but I may state before doing so that I had an interview yesterday with Mr. Belilios and Mr. Danby and it appears that nearly all the wharf and pier owners are willing that Mr. Danby and Mr. Cooper should adjudicate on their claims. It was thought that perhaps that arbitration would suffice, but there are two wharf owners who did not

come in under the scheme and did not sign any agreement under the Praya Ordinance, and the point was raised as to whether they were entitled to receive any part of the $180,000. That matter I have gone into and I have come to the conclusion that they are entitled to receive a part of the compensation of the piers and wharves fund. As regards one other; and only one other, wharf owner, a difficulty has arisen in this way. It is a small pier and it is very few hundred dollars that they ask as compensation, but the estate has been administered by the Court and several persons are interested in the money which will be received under the Ordinance. Amongst these persons are some infants. I saw Mr. Bruce Shepherd, who is administrator of the estate, and he says he is not in a position to assent to any deed. He has not any power to do so and bind these infants. In that state of things it seems to me that it will be necessary for us to have some Ordinance, but I am sanguine that between this and the next meeting of the Council I shall be able so to modify this Ordinance as bring in two arbitrators, instead of one, who might settle the amount in the first instance. Then, if people are satisfied with the amount settled there will be no occasion for any litigation. Probably we should have to make some provision for those who are not satisfied with the adjudication and I am afraid it will be still necessary to have an Ordinance so as to clothe the arbitrators with such power that their award will be binding on all parties, including infants, and others who are unable apparently to consent and whose nonconsent might perhaps cause some trouble in the future. Therefore I will ask with your permission to postpone the second reading of this Bill until I have had time to modify it and see some one on this subject. One matter I should mention with regard to it. I suppose if there is to be an arbitrator in addition to Mr. Cooper that he will charge his fees. I have not gone into that question, but probably there will be the cost of arbitration and I do not know that there is any fund provided for such cost. I should suggest that any cost would have to come out of the $180,000, as that seems the only sum available for it.

HIS EXCELLENCY—We will postpone the second reading of the Bill. I think there is hardly any necessity to meet this day fortnight. The senior unofficial member considers that this day month will be early enough and I agree with him. We will therefore adjourn until this day month.

The Council then adjourned.