Re: QN#KaIC"@W1aK Hot And Nasty Phone Fucking!!! QN#KaIC"@W1aK

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." "These Acts declare it unlawful for anyone owing
allegiance to the British Crown, whether within or without the
dominions of the Crown, to hold or in any way deal in slaves, or