Sessional_Paper_1901 — Page 774

21

humbly praying that, the Bill newly proposed for the registration of householders being too severe, certain moderations and alterations may be made, in order to give peace to the commercial people.

Recently petitioners saw, published in the Government Gazette, a Bill relating to the registration of householders. Petitioners have read it over again and again, and they perceive that there are many good points in it. They can but reverently admire the great care and thought that must have been taken in drawing it up. At the same time they feel very thankful for the deep love and great kindness that have been bestowed on them. They have no doubt that the Bill owed its origin to the idea of securing peace to the merchants by protecting the good and preventing evil. For this kind consideration they feel exceed- ingly grateful. However, there are some sections in the Bill, the requirements contained in which seem to be too hard on the people and therefore can scarcely be put into force. Petitioners have carofnily selectoi a few of such sections and given them below. They bog that your Worship will coudescend to peruse and consider them, and afterwards to make such modifications as your Worship may think proper: that the petitioners' desires may be realised; and the Chinese commercial people of the whole Colony will be infinitely indebted to your Worship for your kindness.

1. Petitioners find that in section 10 of the Bill all householders, who do not live permanently in the Colony, are required to procure agents and to enter into a bond, with two securities, for the sum of $500. Now, as the term "Householder as employed in the Bill embraces so many interpretatious, and as the householders of houses that are used for family dwellings are mostly poor and frequently have to go back to Canton or Macao, we fear that they would have some difficulty in providing the securities. There is yet another difficulty. The nature of business in Hongkong is very varied- -it may be large or it may be small; but the families of most of the business men live in the country and therefore these men are obliged to travel to and fro. It is not infrequent that a few men start a business together with a capital of only $200 or $300, the shareholders of which may each become the manager in turn. Now if only one share- holder should be registered and if it should happen that he has, on some other business, to return to his country for a few months, it would be very inconvenient if, in that care, an agent and securities were required. Petitioners fear that men doing business with a small capital, when this Bill is made known to them, would regard it with dread. Moreover the fee for the registration of the agent is $5. There may be some men who, doing a small business with but little profit, will find it hard to pay this fee. If they should secretly (¿.., without getting an agent paying the fee, &c.) go back to the country, and be detected, they would invariably be punished. This makes it very hard for business men to know what to do to get a living. Petitioners fear that, should this Bill become law, the commercial prosperity of the Colony would thereby certainly suffer. Again, in section 10 it is laid down that if the agent should be dead or absent from the Colony, another must be found to take his place. Now, during the year Chinese traders in Hong- kong may have to go to the country, or some other place and may be away for one month or more, as it is impossible to be certain beforehand what changes may be necessary in their pursuit of a livelihood. If they have to report every change and to find an agent and a security, it will not only cause them a great deal of trouble but the fees that have to be paid every time a report is made will be found to be too heavy for men doing a small business. In the humble opinion of Petitioners there should be in the registration of house- holders a distinction between houses used as shops and houses used as family dwellings. In the case of houses used as family dwellings if a householder should be temporarily absent from the Colony on business. but his family still resides in Hongkong, be should not be required to procure an agent except in the case of those who have leased their houses and whose absence from Hongkong exceeds one year. In the case of houses used for shops cach shareholder of a business should be recognised as a “householder" and therefore be entitled to manage the affairs of the business. If the person whose name appears first in order on the register should be absent from Hongkong the person whose name is next on the register should be made responsible, and so on in regular order. This would render it unnecessary to find an agent. If a business should belong to one person only and he has to leave the Colony, Petitioners would suggest that he he allowed to follow the English practice of giving a power of attorney himself to another person to act as his agent. This would render it unnecessary to report at your office, and thus save the poor from embarrass- ment and the rich from trouble, which would indeed be a kinduess to the people.

2. It is a common practice for business men to make searches of the registers. However, there are in the Colony small as well as large firms. Now if the fee for every search be from $1 to $5, how can those carrying on a small business afford to pay so large a fee? It would therefore seem right that the question of the amount of the fee should be considered with a view to its being reduced out of regard for those engaged in business.

Petitioners find, in Sections 17, 18 and 19, that if a fine cannot be recovered from the actual offender against the law, it is to be recovered from the householder whose goods and chattels are liable to be distrained and whose rents may be taken to pay the fine. The fine thus paid, however, may, by suit, be again recovered by the householder from the actual offender. Now if the Government with all its severo laws finds it difficult to recover a fine from an obdurate suitor, how much more difficult will it be for ordinary commercial men to recover such fine? A prosecution to recover a fine for an offence against the law is a public prosecution, whereas an action for recovery of a debt is a private suit, and it is clear which is the more serious of the two. Moreover suits for recovery of debts are considered trifling matters in Hongkong. If a man be imprisoned for debt, he is provided with food and other necessaries and he may thus wax fat without having to work. What deterrent effect, then, can this have ou men of the incorrigible