HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 329
17th December, 1947.
PRESENT: —
HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR (SIR ALEXANDER WILLIAM GEORGE HERDER GRANTHAM, K. C. M. G.)
HIS EXCELLENCY THE GENERAL OFFICER COMMANDING THE TROOPS (MAJOR GENERAL G. W. E. J. ERSKINE, C. B., D. S. O.)
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY (HON. D. M. MACDOUGALL, C.M.G.)
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (HON. J. B. GRIFFIN, K.C.)
THE SECRETARY FOR CHINESE AFFAIRS (HON. R. R. TODD).
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY (HON. C. G. S. FOLLOWS, C. M. G., Acting). HON. V. KENNIFF (Director of Public Works).
DR. HON. I. NEWTON (Director of Medical Services).
DR. HON. J. P. FEHILY, O.B.E. (Chairman, Urban Council).
HON. D. F. LANDALE.
HON. CHAU TSUN-NIN, C.B E.
HON. LO MAN-KAM, C.B.E.
DR. HON. CHAU SIK-NIN.
HON. LEO D'ALMADA, K.C.
HON. R. D. GILLESPIE.
HON. M. M. WATSON.
MR. ALASTAIR TODD (Deputy Clerk of Councils).
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 330
MINUTES.
The Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 3rd December, 1947, were confirmed.
MOTIONS.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved: —
That the amendment made by the Urban Council on the 25th day of November, 1947, under section 4 of the Public Health (Sanitation) Ordinance, 1935, Ordinance No. 15 of 1935, to the by-laws under the heading "Cemeteries" and sub-heading "B. Chinese Cemeteries" in Schedule A to the said Ordinance, be approved.
He said: Sir, the purpose of the resolution is to secure the approval of this Council as required by section 5 of the Public Health (Sanitation) Ordinance, 1935, for by-laws which have been made by the Urban Council. A copy of such by-laws is attached to the Order of Business. The effect of the amendment which has been made by the Urban Council is to introduce a permit fee for removal of exhumed remains.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the motion was carried. DEATHS REGISTRATION (SPECIAL REGISTERS) BILL, 1947.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the First reading of a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to authorise the Registrar General of Births and Deaths to keep special registers of deaths for the purpose of registering deaths previously registered in specified lost registers of deaths formerly kept by the Registrar General of Births and Deaths."
He said: Sir, the Order of Business contains the Second and subsequent readings with reference to a Bill shortly entitled Births Registration (Special Registers) Ordinance, 1947. The remarks, Sir, which I made in this Council upon introducing the First reading of such Bill are mutatis mutandis applicable to the Bill the First reading of which I am now moving.
The main purpose of the Bill is to provide for the fact that the registers of deaths which are described in Parts I and II of the First Schedule to the Bill have been lost as a result of enemy occupation. This Bill, however, is a little simplified by the fact that the lost registers refer to registers which were kept under two ordinances, that of 1896 and that of 1934, and not under three ordinances as in the case of the other Bill to which I have referred. The process which is envisaged by the Bill which I am now introducing is otherwise the same as that adopted and applied by the Births Registration Ordinance of which the Second and Third readings are down on the Order of Business for to-day.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a First time.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 331
Objects and Reasons.
The “Objects and Reasons” for the Bill were stated as follows: —
1. During the Japanese occupation of the Colony a number of registers of deaths (including certified copies of entries in District Registers) formerly kept in the General Register Office and in District Registry Offices were lost. A complete list of all the lost registers (which by Clause 3 of the Bill are deemed to be lost) is contained in the First Schedule to the Bill which is divided into two parts so as to distinguish the lost registers by reference to the Ordinance under which they were kept. The lost registers listed in Part I were kept under the Births and Deaths Registration Ordinance, 1896 (Ordinance No. 7 of 1896), and those listed in Part II were kept under the Births and Deaths Registration Ordinance, 1934 (Ordinance No. 21 of 1934).
2. Many persons still possess certified copies of entries in the lost registers originally given to them pursuant to Section 21 of Ordinance No. 7 of 1896 or Section 23 of Ordinance No. 21 of 1934, and desire to re-register the deaths to which such certified copies relate. Many other persons possess some other form of evidence of registration of a death in a lost register of lesser evidential value (e.g. a certificate in Form No. 11 in the Second Schedule to Ordinance No. 21 of 1934) and they too desire to re-register the death to which that evidence relates. But legislative provision is absent to enable such re-registration of deaths to be effected. The object of this Bill is to provide such legislation.
3. Clause 2 of the Bill necessarily contains definitions of—
(a) death certificates originally given pursuant to Section 21 of Ordinance No. 7 of 1896 or Section 23 of Ordinance No. 21 of 1934 respectively;
(b) the groups of lost registers formerly kept under those two Ordinances; and
(c) the two pairs of special new registers intended to be opened and kept for re-registration purposes.
4. Clause 4 of the Bill provides that for the purposes of re-registration there shall be kept a pair of new registers (numbered 1 and 2) in respect of each of the two Ordinances above quoted. Pairs of new registers are necessary in respect of each Ordinance because the evidence to support application for re registration will be of two distinct categories, i.e. —
(a) evidence afforded by certified copies of entries in lost registers;
(b) evidence other than that afforded by certified copy and therefore of lesser value.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 332
Accordingly in the No. 1 Registers, the evidence afforded by certified copies of entries given pursuant to Section 21 of Ordinance No. 7 of 1896 or Section 23 of Ordinance No. 21 of 1934 will be registered. In the No. 2 Registers, the information made available by any other form of evidence will be registered provided the Registrar General considers such evidence satisfactory and gives his consent to registration.
5. The forms of the No. 1 Register and of the No. 2 Register in respect of each such Ordinance are contained in separate Schedules to the Bill (namely, the Second and Third). In each such Schedule Form No. 1 is a facsimile of the statutory form employed under Ordinance No. 7 of 1896 or Ordinance No. 21 of 1934 respectively; and Form No. 2 in each such Schedule differs respectively from Form No. 1 only in so far as it provides for the recording of the Registrar General's consent.
6. Clause 5 of the Bill entitles as of right any person in possession of a certified and sealed copy of an entry of a death given pursuant to Section 21 of Ordinance No. 7 of 1896 or Section 23 of Ordinance No. 21 of 1934 to registration in Form No. 1 of the appropriate special register of deaths.
7. Clause 6 of the Bill provides for registration in Form No. 2 of the appropriate special register of deaths, i.e. where the Registrar General considers the evidence of previous registration to be satisfactory and records his consent to registration.
8. Clause 8 of the Bill requires the sealing of all certified copies of entries given in the Registrar General's Office and also distinguishes between the evidential value which will attach to entries and certified copies of entries in a No. 1 Register relating to Section 21 of Ordinance No. 7 of 1896, and the evidential value of entries and certified copies of entries in a No. 1 Register relating to Section 23 of Ordinance No. 21 of 1934. The necessity for distinction in the evidential value (Clause 8(2) and (3) of the Bill) occurs because Section 21 of Ordinance No. 7 of 1896 provides that every entry and every certified copy of an entry in registers kept under that Ordinance shall be received as evidence of the death to which the same relates without other or further proof of such entry, whereas Section 23 of Ordinance No. 21 of 1934 provides that the evidential value of entries and certified copies of entries in registers kept under that Ordinance shall be qualified by various conditions mentioned in such section. Additionally, Clause 8(4) of the Bill provides that an entry or certified copy of an entry in any of the No. 2 Registers will not of itself alone afford proof of registration in a lost register because the evidence required by the Bill (Clauses 5 and 6) for registration in a No. 2 Register is inferior to the evidence required for registration in a No. 1 Register.
9. Clauses 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the Bill contain necessary ancillary provisions.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 333
POLICE FORCE (RETIREMENT OF CERTAIN OFFICERS) BILL, 1947.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the First reading of a Bill intituled “An Ordinance to provide for the payment of pensions or gratuities to certain officers of the Police Force who have elected to retire in circumstances which would not otherwise entitle them to pension or gratuity.”
He said: In 1941 the re-organisation of the Police Force, effecting a reduction in the European establishment of non-gazetted officers of the Police, was under consideration. Since the liberation of the Colony, such policy has been pursued. In application of such a policy, the normal course would be to apply the process of abolition to such Police Officers the services of whom were being dispensed with in the process of re-organisation. It is not, however, possible to apply such procedure in this case because in fact the offices, or certain of the offices, are not being abolished. It has therefore been found convenient and necessary to legislate specially so as to enable officers who elect to retire under this scheme of re-organisation to obtain pension or gratuity as the case may be on terms appearing in Clause 3 of the Bill, which would be analogous to terms upon abolition of office.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a First time.
Objects and Reasons.
The "Objects and Reasons" for the Bill were stated as follows: —
1. In 1941 the re-organisation of the Police Force with a view to reducing the European establishment of non-gazetted police officers was under consideration. Since the liberation this policy has been applied.
2. The normal method of dealing with persons displaced by a reduction of establishment would be by compulsory retirement on abolition of office, but the offices in many cases are not being abolished and in such cases there is no power to award a pension or gratuity. In view of the circumstances of the internment of most of the officers concerned and the fact that they could reasonably expect to resume their employment, compulsory retirement without a pension or gratuity would be inequitable.
3. All non-gazetted European officers of the Police Force were therefore asked to elect before the 15th July, 1947, whether they would retire irrespective of whether they had reached the age of 45 or completed fifteen years of service, provided that a pension or gratuity, as the vase may be, be paid on the basis set out in Clause 3 of the Bill. Such are the terms which have been applied on retirement on abolition of office.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 334
4. The response enables the commencement of the reduction of the European non-gazetted officers of the Police Force and Clause 2 of the Bill enables the payment of pensions and gratuities to those officers of the Police Force who, before the 15th July, 1947, gave notice of their willingness to retire on the terms abovementioned.
5. The object of this Bill is to enable the payment of pension or gratuity to officers who have elected to retire.
BANKING BILL, 1947.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the First reading of a Bill intituled “An Ordinance to provide for the regulation and licensing of the business of banking.”
He said: Sir, at the present time the legislation of the Colony does not contain provision for the regulation or control of the business of banking. Within recent times it has been shown that necessity exists for the provision of some such legislation because persons or organisations have been doing business in the Colony on occasion or in certain cases without having adequate financial backing. Additionally, it has been found that there are organisations doing business of the nature of banking business which is not in fact of value to the Colony since they are engaged in speculation or in the infringement of trade or exchange control regulations of this Colony or of China.
The purpose of this Bill is to provide legislation of the type which, as I have said, is considered to be necessary. As summarised, the content of the Bill is as follows: —It visualises that upon the enactment of this Bill, thenceforth banking business in the Colony may be conducted only by a company as defined in the Bill. Superimposed upon that requirement, the Bill envisages that a company desiring to do banking business shall also obtain a licence from the Governor in Council. The Bill provides that thereafter, except with the express authority of the Governor in Council, no person or business shall continue to employ the term "bank" or any derivative of the term "bank" in the title of its business. The Bill also provides for power in the Governor to appoint an Advisory Committee to advise him in matters relating to banking, and special powers are also given to the Governor in Council because, by Clause 7, it is provided that the Governor in Council, after consultation with the Advisory Committee, and if he considers it to be in the public interest so to do, may order any licensed bank to produce books, accounts and documents; to delete from its name the description "bank"; to refrain from carrying on banking business; and to return for cancellation the licence which it had obtained from the Governor in Council to do banking business.
Necessary ancillary provisions in the Bill provide that there shall be an annual licence fee payable by a licensed bank on the second day of each calendar year to the amount of $5,000. There is a requirement that a licensed bank shall give publicity to its balance sheet; there is power upon application to a magistrate to obtain a
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 335
search warrant to authorise entry into premises if there is reasonable suspicion that contravention of the Ordinance is taking place; and finally, by Clause 15, there is provision for penalty both on summary conviction and on trial upon indictment.
Most importantly, I would add that the Bill is designed to apply not only to organisations which in the future may desire to do banking business, but also to organisations which do such business at the time of the commencement of this Ordinance. It has therefore been necessary to include in the Bill transitional provisions. Such provisions appear in Clauses 12 and 13. Broadly stated, Clause 12 applies to organisations doing banking business and being companies at the time of the commencement of this Ordinance. In that Clause is given a period of thirty days within which to make application for a licence and consequential provision is included for those cases where a licence to continue to do banking business is refused, while Clause 13 applies to such organisations as are not companies and in their case provides that notwithstanding the prohibition against doing banking business by any organisation other than a company it will be possible for them to apply to the Governor in Council for a special licence to enable them to continue to do such business.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a First time.
Objects and Reasons.
The "Objects and Reasons" for the Bill were stated as follows: —
1. In recent months there has been a large increase in the number of persons or organisations in the Colony doing business of the nature of banking business. Among such are "banks" having inadequate capital or which conduct banking business which is of no value to the Colony since they are engaged in speculation or in the infringement of trade or exchange control regulations of the Chinese Government and of this Colony.
2. In these circumstances it is considered to be necessary to provide legislation at present lacking for the regulation and licensing of the business of banking in the Colony. The object of this Bill is so to provide.
3. The Bill primarily provides—
Clause 1—Definitions of the terms "bank", "banking business", "bank note", “company”, "licensed bank", "note-issuing bank" and “person”:
Clause 3—That no banking business shall be transacted in the Colony except by a company:
Clause 4—That no company shall continue or commence to carry on banking business without obtaining a licence from the Governor in Council who may refuse to grant a licence:
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 336
Clause 5—That no person other than a company licensed to carry on banking business shall use or continue to use the word "bank" in the name under which business is being carried on without the consent of the Governor in Council.
4. Clause 12 of the Bill contains transitional provisions, such provisions being necessary since the Bill is designed to apply, not only to future, but also to "banks" existing when the Bill upon enactment comes into operation. The Clause requires that any bank desiring to continue to carry on banking business after the commencement of the Ordinance shall make application within thirty days for a licence. In the event that a licence is refused to a bank, such bank shall forthwith delete the word "bank" from the name under which it is carrying on business and shall make all necessary arrangements for the termination of its banking business, such arrangements to be concluded within a period of ninety days, or any further period allowed by the Governor in Council.
5. Clause 13 contains further transitional provisions relating to special cases which may be presented where banking business, at the time of commencement of the Bill upon enactment, is being carried on by a person or persons not being a company. The Clause empowers the Governor in Council, if he see fit, to grant a special licence to permit the continuance of such banking business. The Clause further provides that the banking business in respect of which a special licence is granted shall, thereafter, be deemed to be a "licensed bank" to which the provisions of the Bill, upon enactment, relating to "licensed banks" shall apply.
6. Ancillary provisions included in the Bill occur in—
Clause 6 empowering the Governor in Council to appoint an advisory committee to advise him on matters relating to banking business;
Clause 7 which empowers the Governor in Council, after consultation with the advisory committee and if he considers it to be in the public interest so to do, to order any licensed bank to refrain from carrying on banking business and return its licence for cancellation;
Clause 8 which requires the payment of an annual fee by every licensed bank;
Clause 9 which requires every licensed bank to exhibit and publish its last audited Balance Sheet;
Clause 10 which precludes any person who has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment for an offence involving dishonesty or who has been a director or otherwise concerned in the management of a bank which has been wound up by a court, from acting as a director or being otherwise concerned in the management of a licensed bank;
Clause 11 which prohibits the issue of bank notes by any licensed bank other than a note-issuing bank as defined;
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 337
Clause 14 which provides powers of entry, search, detention of documents and arrest, under warrant of a magistrate, where contravention of the Ordinance is reasonably suspected; and
Clause 15 which provides for general penalties for contravention or attempted contravention of the Ordinance upon summary conviction or conviction on indictment.
PROTECTED PLACES (SAFETY) (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1947.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the First reading of a Bill intituled “An Ordinance to amend the Protected Places (Safety) Ordinance, 1946.”
He said: Sir, the Protected Places (Safety) Ordinance, 1946, was enacted last year to meet a special set of circumstances which were presented by the fact that certain places within the Colony which held valuable stores, mainly of the Navy, Army and Air Force, were being subjected to considerable looting. The Ordinance was passed in order to give to authorised guards under certain safeguards the power to use firearms in the protection of such places. Section 2 of such principal Ordinance had by cross-reference declared the protected places for the purpose of the Ordinance to be those protected places so declared under Regulation 32 of the war-time Defence Regulations. But Regulation 32 of the Defence Regulations expires on the 31st December of this year. It is therefore necessary, and Clause 2 of the Bill so provides, to enable declaration of protected places to be made directly under this Ordinance. Clauses 3 and 4 of the Bill make small amendments to the principal Ordinance for purposes of clarification. As to Clause 5, Honourable Members will observe that it provides for the addition to the principal Ordinance of a new section as Section 9. I have mentioned the purposes for which the principal Ordinance was enacted—in fact, it has been found that the Ordinance has been effective, although the drastic though circumscribed powers given by the Ordinance have happily been rarely used. It is therefore contemplated that progressively the number of protected places will be reduced and a point is likely to come where it is desirable that the Ordinance should no longer continue in operation, while at the same time it is being retained on the Statute Book against the event which might arise that its full operation were again necessary. Thus, the new section is intended to empower the Governor by proclamation to suspend the operation of the Ordinance. As at present drafted, the new Section 9 (i) also empowers the Governor, again by proclamation, to terminate a suspension, that is to say, to bring back the Ordinance into full force and effect. It is considered however that it would be more in accordance with constitutional usage if the power to bring the Ordinance back into full force and effect should be the act of this Council. I therefore intend, Sir, at a proper stage to propose the amendment of Section 9 (i) as provided for in Clause 5 so as to provide that a resuscitation of the Ordinance shall occur only upon resolution of this Council.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 338
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a First time.
Objects and Reasons.
The "Objects and Reasons" for the Bill were stated as follows: —
1. Section 2 of the Protected Places (Safety) Ordinance, 1946, the principal Ordinance, defines “Protected Place” as follows: —
““Protected Place” means any premises declared by any order of the Governor for the time being in force to be a protected place under Regulation 32 of the Defence Regulations, 1940, as modified by the Emergency Powers (Extension) Proclamation.”
Regulation 32 is continued in force until the 31st December, 1947, by order (G.N. 540 of 1946), under the authority of the Law Amendment (Transitional Provisions) Ordinance, 1946, but then expires. The amendment to be effected by Clause 2 of the Bill therefore provides that "protected places" shall be declared by the Governor under the authority of the Ordinance and not by reference to Defence Regulations.
2. Section 4(1) (b) (i) of the principal Ordinance provides as follows: — “4. (1) It shall be the duty of an authorised guard:
(a) ………………………
(b) so far as consistent with the proper discharge of any other duty imposed on him by this Ordinance to arrest or assist in the arrest of
(i) any person who if he were in the protected place guarded by such authorised guard could lawfully be removed therefrom under paragraph 3 of Regulation 32 (of the Defence Regulations, 1940) and who is either found therein by such authorised guard or is reasonably suspected by him of attempting to enter such protected place or having recently exited therefrom;”,
It is considered that such employment of cross-reference to Regulation 32 (3) of the Defence Regulations does not suffice clearly to describe a person in respect of whom powers of arrest may be exercised by an authorised guard. Such cross-reference is also inappropriate in view of the imminent expiration of the Defence Regulation in question. The purpose of Clause 2 of this Bill is therefore to effect amendment of the principal Ordinance to make clear such description.
3. Clause 4 is designed to amend Section 8 of the principal Ordinance to make clear the liability to penalty of persons found in a protected place.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 339
4. The powers granted by the principal Ordinance have been very sparingly used. Nevertheless, reports indicate that since the Ordinance came into force there has been a marked decrease in theft from protected places. It is therefore considered desirable to retain the Ordinance but to provide for suspension of its operation when it appears that the need for the Ordinance is no longer imperative. Clause 5 of the Bill provides, therefore, for the addition of a section, as Section 9, to the principal Ordinance to empower the Governor by proclamation to suspend the operation of the Ordinance and, if necessary, to terminate any such suspension.
HONG KONG (REHABILITATION) LOAN BILL, 1947.
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the Second reading of a Bill intituled “An Ordinance to make provision for raising a Loan of one hundred and fifty million dollars for the general rehabilitation of the public services of the Colony following a period of enemy occupation.”
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
HON. M. M. WATSON. —Your Excellency, in rising to speak on the motion my Honourable Friend is moving, I should perhaps first of all make it quite clear that I am in favour of the Bill. I wish, however, to refer to a matter which he introduced in his speech on introducing the Bill for the first time. In his speech, he observed that it was too late to take advantage of the favourable market conditions which had existed at the beginning of the year. Perhaps, Sir, it is for this reason that he has suggested further in that statement—or rather, I should not say "suggested" but that he has stated that Government have under consideration the issue of premium bonds. In an earlier speech I made, Sir, in this Council on the introduction of the Inland Revenue Bill, I expressed my views on the question of Government running lotteries. I am opposed to that. I apprehend, Sir, that the premium bonds to which my Honourable Friend refers will in their nature also be lotteries. I think one can say without the slightest fear of contradiction that it has been the universal practice in England to avoid all kinds of lotteries in which the State would be concerned, so in many cases acts have been passed at Home which have prevented other bodies, not state bodies, from dealing in lotteries.
I should like to refer very shortly to a departmental committee which was set up by the Board of Trade to enquire into Bond Issue Companies, or rather, they were called Bond Investment Companies. This Committee, Sir, having considered the evidence: if I may roughly or shortly put it, you subscribed for your bond and you got a draw by lot and if you were lucky you got an early draw and you dropped your subscription for the rest of the time; the result was you obtained a very large prize. The Committee that considered this matter recommended that every company be prohibited from adopting any system of redemption in which bonds are wholly or partially paid up
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 340
before maturity according to a scheme founded on chance or lot, and that recommendation, Sir, was carried into effect by the Assurance Companies Ordinance of 1909.
I observe, Sir, also, that the present scheme seems to have come out of Palestine. Well, Sir, so far as I am aware, nothing very good has come out of Palestine in modern times; (Cries of 'Shame') although I except—and very sincerely except—my Honourable Friends the Attorney General and the Director of Public Works. (Loud Laughter.) I see, Sir, that the question however is only under discussion and that in due course a Bill will be introduced when a final decision is reached. I therefore will not elaborate at the present time on any form of Bill which my Honourable Friend has suggested might be introduced, but I trust that the decision of the Government would be against sponsoring any kind of Bill which will produce premium bonds or any other form of bond which will be decided by lot; and I am quite sure, Sir, that such a decision will be welcomed by all responsible persons both in Hong Kong and elsewhere.
H.E. THE GOVERNOR. —Are there any other Honourable Members, either responsible or irresponsible, who would wish to speak before the Mover replies?
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY. —The Honourable M. M. Watson has just expressed one point of view in regard to the proposed Premium Bond Issue. When, in moving the first reading of the Bill, I gave some details of this proposed issue, I did so partly with the object of obtaining some indication of public reactions to such a scheme. There has been some comment in the Press and now my Honourable Friend Mr. Watson has given us his views on the subject, which will of course receive the careful consideration of Government. But this is a matter on which opinions are bound to differ and Government naturally welcomes public discussion as it will assist them in gauging the degree of public support which a Bond Issue of this nature would be likely to receive. I agree with my Honourable Friend that in normal times it is preferable for a Government to keep to straight issues but the times are not normal and if there is an adequate measure of public support it is possible to float a Premium Bond Issue under attractive conditions at an appreciably lower cost than a straight issue. Charges for the servicing of loans of the magnitude of those contemplated are heavy, and under present conditions Hong Kong can ill-afford to neglect any possibility of reducing such charges. It is this reason rather than the fact that the market may not now be so favourable as it was earlier in the year that prompted Government to consider a Premium Bond Issue.
In this connection I should like to stress that the proposed issue is not at all in the same category as a lottery or sweepstake where the subscriber has a faint chance of winning a large prize, failing which he inevitably loses his money. In the case of the proposed Premium Bond Issue, the subscriber does not lose his money. This is returned to him in due course and he is even paid interest on it.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 341
But because the interest is at a lower rate than usual, he has the chance that his bond will be drawn at some period during the currency of the Loan at a figure considerably above its face value, and perhaps at hundreds of times above its face value.
The Bill was read a Second time.
Council then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause. Council then resumed.
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY reported that the Hong Kong (Rehabilitation) Loan Bill, 1947, had passed through Committee without amendment and moved the Third reading.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a Third time and passed into law.
JURY AMENDMENT (No. 1) BILL, 1947.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the Second reading of a Bill intituled "An Ordinance further to amend the Jury Ordinance, 1887."
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a Second time.
Council then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause. Council then resumed.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL reported that the Jury Amendment (No. 2) Bill, 1947, had passed through Committee without amendment and moved the Third reading.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a Third time and passed into law.
BIRTHS REGISTRATION (SPECIAL REGISTERS) BILL, 1947.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the Second reading of a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to authorise the Registrar General of Births and Deaths to keep special registers of births for the purpose of registering births previously registered in specified lost registers of births formerly kept by the Registrar General of Births and Deaths."
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a Second time.
Council then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 342
Clause 2.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. —I move an amendment to clause 2 (f) of the Bill so that the words "Lost Register (1896") shall read "Lost Register (1896)".
The amendment was agreed to.
Council then resumed.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL reported that the Births Registration (Special Registers) Bill, 1947, had passed through Committee with one amendment and moved the Third reading.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a Third time and passed into law.
ADJOURNMENT.
H.E. THE GOVERNOR. — That concludes the business, Gentlemen. When is it your pleasure we should meet again?
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. —The 29th of this month.
H.E. THE GOVERNOR. —The 29th is a Monday, which would probably be better than the 31st, which is a Wednesday. Council will adjourn until 2.30 p.m. on the 29th of this month.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.