Page:Europe in China.djvu/457

 since 1843 had never been made law in the Colony; that within the years 1867 and 1868 over $10,674,740 had been staked and lost at the Government gaming houses; that, instead of decreasing gambling, the Government measure had greatly increased the vice; that it caused and fostered very serious crimes and that suicides had been traced to it; that a tone of dishonesty had been engendered by the gaming houses in petty tradesmen and that this tone had demoralised the police; that as gambling is a crime in China as well as in England, the actual licensing of it lowers the prestige of the British Government in China. The Chief Justice submitted also a draft Bill for the repression of gambling, but the Attorney General (J. Pauncefote) considered it so severe that no person in the Colony would be safe from its terrible pains and penalties. The Lieutenant-Governor (H. W. Whitfield) also took sides with the opponents of Sir Richard's measure. He was anxious to close the gambling houses and frankly told Earl Kimberley so (August 29, 1870). He explained that, as their maintenance failed, in his opinion, to check crime, he saw no reason why the Colony should have all the odium of a pernicious system attached to it, whilst it was debarred from the application of the accruing funds which would be of lasting benefit to public institutions generally and more especially to those connected with the Chinese. Inferring from the tenor of the entire correspondence with the Colonial Office, that no more acceptable action could be taken in the Colony than to put a stop to the legalisation of public gambling, Major-General Whitfield took it upon himself, with the approval of the Executive Council, to give notice (August 17, 1870) to the licensees of his intention to close the gaming houses on 1st January, 1871. In Hongkong every one thought the matter settled. But the Earl of Kimberley telegraphically countermanded this measure and informed the gallant General that an officer in temporary administration of the Government should not take upon himself to depart, without express directions from the Secretary of State, from the policy of the Governor whose place he occupies. Accordingly, the licensing system continued for another year, the monopoly being