CHAMBER OF COMMERCE (Continuation).
119
A resolution against this step was passed, to be transmitted to the Chinese Merchants who had addressed the Chamber on the subject. "The outcome of this is not mentioned apparently the protests had little effect.
It is also worth noting that owing largely to the merchants' representations against the proposed Telegraph Convention between the Chinese Government and the Eastern Telegraph Company, in 1890, the proposed convention was abandoned.
In 1890 the question of Sunday working on ships was brought directly to the notice of the Chamber of Commerce by the British Mercantile Marine Association, who urged the desirability of enforcing absolute cessation of all work on board vessels on Sunday. A deputation of mercantile marine officers was received by representatives of the Chamber in October that year, but the shipping interests appear to have outweighed the men's proposals. The record states:
"The question was further considered by the Chamber and it was decided that the loss to the whole Colony, including the junk-men and coolies, in the event of all Sunday work afloat being prohibited, would more than outweigh the gain to the comparatively few Officers who might benefit by the proposed legislation."
Early rumblings against share gambling, which burst into activity a few years ago after the share market crisis following the 1925 strike and boycott, were heard as far back as 1891, for we read that a special meeting was held that year to consider the proposed new Share Sales Bill. The intention of the Bill was to give full protection to bona fide transactions while at the same time checking such reckless gambling as had, within the previous two years, had such a disastrous effect upon the Colony. The majority of members of the Chamber at the meeting, it might be noted, were opposed to the Bill in the form in which it stood, and a resolution to this effect was passed. "In spite, however, of their expressions of opinion, the Government passed the Bill shortly afterwards with practically no amendments.
After a year of operation of the Shares Ordinance, however, the Government approached the Chamber in 1892, for an expression of their views on the working of the new law. We read that: "Two meetings were held, at which long and able speeches were made by several of the leading Merchants of the colony. The speeches were at times, unfortunately, of a distinctly personal and acrimonious character. Opinions differed very widely from leaving the Bill as it was, amending it one way or another, or in rescinding it in toto. In the end it was agreed by a small majority to ask the Governor to give the Bill a further six months' trial and then again refer the matter to the Chamber. The further fate of the discussion is not mentioned.
Page 120
Page 121
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE (Continuation ).
119
resolution against this step was passed, to be transmitted to the Chinese Merchants who had addressed the Chamber on the subject. " The outcome of this is not mentioned appa- rently the protests had little effect.
It is also worth noting that owing largely to the merchants' representations against the proposed Telegraph Convention between the Chinese Government and the Eastern Telegraph Company, in 1890, theproposed convention was abandoned.
In 1890 the question of Sunday working on ships was brought directly to the notice of the Chamber of Com- merce by the British Mercantile Marine Association, who urged the desirability of enforcing absolute cessation of all work on board vessels on Sunday. A deputation of mercantile marine officers was received by representatives of the Chamber in October that year, but the shipping interests appear to have outweighed the men's proposals. The record states :
The question was further considered by the Chamber and it was decided that the loss to the whole Colony, including the junk-men and coolies, in the event of all Sunday work afloat being prohibited; would more than outweigh the gain to the comparatively few Officers who might benefit by the proposed legislation. "
Early rumblings against share gambling, which burst into activity a few years ago after the share market crisis following the 1925 strike and boycott ) were heard as far back as 1891, for we read that a special meeting was held that year to consider the proposed new Share Sales Bill. The intention of the Bill was to give full protection to bona fide transactions while at the same time checking such reckless gambling as had, within the previous two years" had such a disastrous effect upon the Colony. it The majority of member of the Chamber at the meeting, it might be noted, were opposed to the Bill in the form in which it stood, and a resolution to this effect was passed. "In spite, however, of their ex-** pressions of opinion, the Government passed the Bill short- ly afterwards with pratically no amendments.
After a year of operation of the Shares Ordinance. however, the Government approached the Chamber in 1892, for an expression of their views on the working of the new law. We read that : "Two meetings were held.. at which long and able speeches were made by several of the leading Merchants of the colony. The speeches were at times, unfortunately, of a distinctly personal and acrimonious character. Opinions differed very widely from leaving the Bill as it was, amending it one way or ancther, or in rescinding it in toto. In the end it was agreed by a small majority to ask the Governor to give the Bill a further six months trial and then again refer the matter to the Chamber The further fate of the dis- cussion is not mentioned.
tt
Page 120Page 121
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.