🚀 go-pugleaf

years previously." He then enters into history to show that "Mr.
    Francis of necessity studied ... the whole law on the subject of
    slavery or bondage in every form here."

Mr. Francis first reviews all the legislative measures existent at
Hong Kong concerning slavery, in the clearest manner possible, leaving
no doubts in the mind of any fair-minded person that laws were not
wanting to put down slavery:

    First: Hong Kong, being a Crown Colony, "the power of the
    Sovereign in respect of legislation is absolute."

    Second: The proclamation of Sir Charles Elliott, of tolerance
    of native customs was "pending Her Majesty's pleasure," and no
    longer.

    Third: Her Majesty's pleasure was declared at Hong Kong: (a) By
    the Proclamation of 1845; (b) "By Ordinance 6 of 1845, 2 of 1846,
    and 12 of 1873, by the combined operation of which the law of
    England, common and statute, as it existed on the 5th day of
    April, 1843, became the law of Hong Kong."

    Says Mr. Francis of Ordinance 6 of 1845, "The relations of husband
    and wife, parent and child, guardian and ward, master and servant,
    whatever they may have been when Hong Kong was Chinese, became
    from the date of that Ordinance what English law made them, and
    nothing more or less."

    "But in addition to the declarations of the Common Law," declares
    Mr. Francis, the following are in full force at Hong Kong: "The
    Act of the 5th George IV. c. 113, the Act of the 3rd and 4th
    William IV. c. 73, and the Act 6th and 7th Victoria c. 98, which
    have in the widest terms abolished slavery throughout the British
    dominions." "