From: Horry on
brought
to us of the condition of things. We appeared on the scene one
morning about 10 o'clock with an officer. Leaving him outside, we
entered, and found the woman and child eating breakfast. Three
other women and two men soon came in. After talking for a while I
saw the woman was anxious to get the child away from the table, so
I informed her we had come to take her, and proceeded to do so,
catching the child up and darting into the street, leaving my
interpreter and the officer to follow. We ran several blocks,
followed by the irate woman. Finally hailing a man with a horse
and wagon, we sprang in and were driven away to where we could
take the street cars for home. The child did some screaming and
crying, at first. But once we were seated in the street car, her
tears were dried and her little tongue rattled along at a rapid
rate; she was delighted to get away.

"The case was in court for some weeks, but the woman was afraid
to appear, and had no one to assist her but the lawyer, and as he
could not prove any good reason why the child should remain with
an immoral woman, we were given the guardianship."

No. 9. A young girl came to San Francisco from China as a
merchant's wife, and missionaries used to visit her at her home in
Chinatown. Once when they went they were told that the wife had
gone to San Jose, but she could not be traced at the latter place,
and the missionary was suspicious. A year passed, and one night
the door bell at the Mission rang, and when it was op


From: Horry on
the Chief
Justice.

On May 30th, 1879, Sir John Smale, Chief Justice of the Colony of Hong
Kong, wrote a letter for the information of the Governor, Sir John
Pope Hennessy, to the effect that he had sentenced, on the previous
day, two poor women to imprisonment with hard labor, for detaining
a boy 13 years old. The women sold the little boy to a druggist for
$17.50. The relatives traced their lost boy, came from Canton and
claimed him, but the druggist refused to give him up, producing a
bill of sale, and the boy was not given up until they appeared in the
police court. The Chief Justice adds:

"I am satisfied from the evidence that the great criminal is this
druggist, and that it is an opprobrium to the administration of
justice to punish these poor women as I have done, and allow the
druggist to escape. I therefore ask His Excellency to direct that
proceedings be forthwith taken against the man, and that the case
be conducted at the magistracy by the Crown Solicitor, so that he
may be committed for trial before the Supreme Court."

He then speaks of a case of a woman whom he sentenced on May 6th,
1879, to two years' imprisonment with hard labor for stealing a female
child. He adds:

"The woman was merely a middle woman, and received a small sum,
but it came out in the evidence that Leung A-Luk had bought the
child for $53, and was actually confining her in a room where
the child was discovered. She was the great criminal. It is an
opprobrium to justice to punish this poor woman, and to allow
Leung A-Luk to go unpunished. I am aware that, according to
precedents here and at home, it is within the province of the
presiding judge to direct prosecutions such as these to be
instituted, but I think i