Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1698069857753.pdf (Guyana)
~ ·.

•"-~.- sao:w.,.

• ·----.

:----..-_,,,....._=----, 2676 2675 LEGISLATI-YE COUNGU.

(Constitut ed under the BritiS'h Guiana (Oonstitu fJion) ( T emporary Provisions) Order in Council, 1953.)

FRIDAY, 21ST JUNE, 1957.

T he Hon.

R B. Gajraj T he Hon.

R. C. Tello Nominated Of f icial : ' Mr. J. I. Ramphal Nominated Unoflicials: Mr. W. A. Phang Mr. C. A. Carter M1-.

E. F. Correia The Council met at 2 p.m. Mr. H. Rahaman PRgSENT His Hon:our t he S pealcer: Sir Eustace Gordon Woolford, O.B.E ., Q.C.
E x-Officio Members: T he H on.

t he Chief Secrefary, Mr. M. S. Porcher (Ag.)

The H on.

the At.to!·ney General, Mr. A. M. I. Austin.

Miss Gertie H. Collins Mrs. Esther E. Dey Dr. H. A. Fraser Mr. R. B. Jailal l\fr Sugrim Singh Mr. W. T. Lord, I. S. 0.

· 1 Clerk of the L egislature: M r. I. Crum ·Ewing A ssistant Clerk of t/ie L egislature: Mr. E. V. Viapree The Hon.

the Financial Seci::eta.ry, Mr. F .

W. Essex.

Absent: ~ Nominated Members of E xeciitiv e Coiincil: The Hon.
Sir Frank McDavid, C.M.G., C.B.E.

(Member for Agricul ture, Forests, Lands and Mines ) .

The H on.

P.A.

Cummings, (Mem ber for Labour, H ealth and Housing) .

The Hon.

W .

0.

R. Kendall (Mem l;,er for Communications and W or.ks).

The Hon.

G. A. C. Farnum, O.R.E.

(Member for Local Government, Social Welfare and Co-operative Develop ment).

-on leave.

Mr. T. Lee-on leave.

l\lr.

L. A. Luckhoo.

Q.C - on leave.

Rev.

D. C. J. Bob~on leave The Speaker r ead prayers.


~ .__,.....,..,... - ~ -.;::,::;:..

.. -~ ...... · 2677 Minutes 21ST JUNE, 1957 Bills 2678 The Minutes of the meet ing of the Co uncil held on Thursday, 20th June, 1957, as printed and circulated, were taken as read and confirmed.

ANNOUNCEMENTS LEAVE TO MEM'BERS Mr. Speaker: Mr. Luckhoo is unable to be present today.

He has two motions on the Order Paper.

I propose to have them d.eferred until next week.

The Rev.

Mr. Bobb has as ked to be excused.


He is still not feeling well.

Mr. Farnum has asked to oe excused from today's meeting.

PAPERS LAID The Attorney General (Mr. Austin ) : Sir, I beg to lay on the table: Preliminary Report of the Land Rf'gis tration Committee appointed by the Executive Council to consider and report on the desirability of the introduction of in a modern Land Registration (System British Guiana and the form which such system should take, dated 30th day of April.
1957, together with Sessional Paper No.

11/ 1957 thereon.

ORDER OF THE DAY The Attorney G~neral: Sir, I beg to move that this Council a gr,ees to pro ceed forthwith with the second reading of the following Bills:- J_.

D' Abreu Pension Bill, 1957.

2.

Dias P ension Bill, 1957.

B. Volunteer 1957.

( Amendment) Bill, 4.

Deeds Registry (Amendment) Bill, 1957.

·5 .. Development Fund (1955 and ~il.956 Appropriation) Bill, 1957. t6.

Excise Regulations .r:ne.nt) Bill, 1957.

(.Ap)enrl- 7.
(.Ap)enrl- 7.

Post and Telegraph ment) Bill, 1957.

(Amend 8.

Local Government (Hopetown and Bel Air Country Districts) (Special Provis ions) Bill, 1957.

!J.

Animals (Control of Experi- ments ) Bill, 1957, a resolution super and annuation benefits of the Government House staff.

r egard ing The Chief Secretary (Mr. Porcher, a~ting) : I beg to second t he motion.
Mr. Ramphal: Sir, I would hesitate to detain the Council one minute, but I rose because I would not wish to do any thing now that would be a precedent and therefore I am thinking of guidance more than an~·thing else.

This motion is, shall I say, an omnibus one.

of s everal matters to come, and I am asking the Chair's guidance as to whether we can a ntic ipate the several items that hav,e It is purely on that been enumerated.

point that I have risen for assistance.


Personally I think that it mi,ght have been better to deal with them a s we get to them.

Look at the word '· forthwith "-we may not finish the motions today.

In addiition, there may time elapsing before we be much arrive at some.

There may be other urgeJ1t matters that come between them in course of time.

Mr. Speaker: I regret that I cannot concede to the hon.

M.ember's request much as I would like to do so.


I have expressed my own views to a certain ex I am not prepar.ed to say it is al tent.

together correct to give notice of so many motions but there is very little difference between putting them on the Order Paper and asking the r.esolution be passed.

Instead of moving them separately, they are moved in mass .

that .

- - -•·------- :II' 2679 D'Abreu 2 1 ST J UNE, 1957 P ension Bill 2680 Mr. Ramphal: I was only asking for guidance on procedure.
I ap preciate ever ything about the urgency of the matter.

Mr. Speaker: In the circumstances the Government is practically asking the Council to do it.

There is no ob think the present moment jection.

cou ld be called a .necessity-I am not not prepared to .say it is.

I Mt·.

Ramphal: I would agree, Sir, that it is a11 urgent necessity.

Mr. Speaker: If the Government thinks it would eliminate t he danger of anything being deferred, I thi nk I could have it this way.
I would like th e motion moved by the hon.

the Attorney Geucr al approved.

Mr. Speaker: Does anyone wish to speak on this motion?

Question put, a nd agreed to.

Bill r ead a second t ime.

COUNCIL lN 1COMMITTEE Council r esolved itself into Com mit(,ee and pa,:sed t he Bill as printed.

Cou ncil resumed.

The Chief Secreta ry: I beg to move that the Bill be read a t hird t ime and passed.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill read a third time and passed.

Question put, and agreed to.

Motion affirmed.


D' ABREU PENSI()N BILL DIAS PENSION B ILL I The Chief Secretary: r ise to move the second reading of t he Bill which st ands as item 3 on the Order of the Day, and intituled: I rise The Chief Secretary: to move the s econd reading of the B i ll which stands as.

item 2 on the Order Paper.

This is'.

a very f hort piece of I lf:gislation t hink, 'is fu lly explained in the Obiects and Reasons.

t he object of which.


· · Very briefly, Mrs. Pauline D'Abreu served as Senior Instructress of the Carnegie Trade School from 1937 up to 1946.

She then retired after attain iug t he age of 60 year•s and r eceived a .small gratuity.

The post was made pens ionab'Ie and she was s ubsequently re-employed for a further 10 year s or .so, and the Government f eels t hat she s hould be allowed to draw a pension in respect of that long and faithfu l service which she ·has g iven.
I very much hope that Members will s npport th is Bill which I now move.

The Attorney General _: I beg to .second the motion.

"An Ordinance to make special pro the Pension and vision in regard to Gratuity payable to Vivian Charles Dias", This is a s imilar type of Bill, in re spect of Mr. Vivian Charles Dias, Cro,vn Solicitor , who is retiring in November of t his year.
·holder of Mr. Dias was appointed as Grown Solicitor in l!l42 but he was appointed in an acting capacity becaus e t he s ub the office, Mr. stantive King, was seconded to special d uties arising out of the war.

Mr. ;King con tinued to serve in t hose special duties on secondment until 1947 and t he post did n ot become vacant until then.

Therefore Mr .
Therefore Mr .

Dias could not b e ap pointed substantively to it until 1947, so out of a total of 15 years service, only 10 years counted for pens ion, but ill fact he has s erve d in the pos t con tinu ously for 15 years.

2681 Dias Pension B ill 21ST J UNE, 1 957 Volnntee:r (A melt.)
Bill 2682 LThe Chief Secretar y] Government f eels in view of hi s eITicient and faithful service an d the fact that thr ough no fault of his own he: could not be appointed to the post earlier, specia l legislation should be to enable t he whole of his passed service to be counted for pension.

I now move the second rea ding of t;his Bil!.

The Attorney General: I beg t o second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill read a second time.


COUNCIL IN ·COMMITTEE Council r esolved itself into Com mittee and passed t he Bill as printed.

Council r esumed.

The Chief Secretary: I beg to mo ve that the Bill be now read a third time and passed.

The Attorney General: I beg to set:ond the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill r ead t he third t ime and passed.
line which appe'ar ed in one of the dail y newspapers during tiiis week' in con nection with th e Police Bill, which gave the impression that that Bill was at te111pting to creat e a military fo1'ce; but I think tha t t his Bill now before us that headline prnres con<:lus i\'Cly that was wrong, because foe object of this [3-ill is to t ransfer the c ommand an<l responsibility of the Volunteer F ol'ce fro m the Commissioner of Police, who i,; at present responsible for it as t he Co111manclant of Lot:al Forces, to the Commanding Officer of t he Volunteer Force.
So the Commi ssioner of P olice will no longer in future haye to de'al with military ranks.

should The Bill also contains prons1ons for two oaths which members of the take.

One Vol unteer F orce renden; them liable fo r service within the Colony alone and the other renders them liable to serve H er Majest y t he Que-en where \'er they are called to do so.

It is entirely optional to each mem ber of tile Force which oath he takes.
T he r est of the clauses .of t he Bill are largely consequential amendments.

I now beg to move the second r eatling.

The Attorney General: I beg to VOLU NTEER ( AMENDMENT) BILL second the motion.

The Chief Secretary : r ise to move the second reading of t he Bill whici1 stands ,as item 4 on the Orde1· of the Day an d intituled : I ·· An Ordinance to amend the Vol unteer Ordinance".
This Bill should really be taken in con junction with the Bill which deals with th e Police Ordinance, s,econd 1·eading of which I p roposed for next week.

the Hon .

Members, a nd very likely some members of the publi.c, must i1ave been 1?Q!

'l1e~ ha~ concerned over a head- Question put, and agreed to.

Bill r e•ad a second time.

COUNCIL IN C OMMITTEE Council r esolved itself into Com· mitlee and passed the Bill as printed.

Council rest;med.
Council rest;med.

The Chief Secretary: to move th at the Bill be now read a tllird time an d passed.

I beg The Attorney General : I beg to second the motion.

2683 tJ eecls Registry 21ST JUNE, 1957 (A mendme,nt) Bill 2684 Question put, and agl'eed to.

Bill read a third time and passed.

DEEDS REGISTRY (AMENDMENT ) BILL The Attorney General : I beg to moYe the second reading of the Bill intituled: ·· An Ordinance further to amEnd the Deeds Registry Ordinance".
is specially connected with This Bill the Report of the Land Registration Committee, whic.i1 was laid on the· table earlier in this sitting as a Session al Paper, a nd it is unfortunate Members haYe not had the opportunity to read It is a vet·y the r eport.

inte1·esting document and dea ls with a very in1port I think it might help if 1 ant s ubject.

this briefly give the background to Deeds R,egi.stry (Amendment) Bili.

Hon.
Hon.

Members will recall that a a very strong Committee Committee - - w,as appointed in May 1956 to ex amine the question wJ1ether a modern system of land registration s ho uld be The introduced "in British Guiana.

Committee was to be presided .over by the Attorney General, Mr. Wylie, at the time.

It included the Commissioner of Lands and Mines, the Registrar of Deeds, and a number -of competent legal practitioners.

Mr. Wylie left British Guiana Ehortly after the appointment of the Committee.
Mr. J. Edward de the Gi1•airmanship Freitas and has been heading the Committee i11 its work until he went on leave a short time ago.

assumed The work of the Committee is a very stupendous taF.k - to examine the system of land tenure in this coun try and to recommend whether or not a new system sh ould be adopte d, eithe1· to revise the present system or let it run s ide by side with a supplementary one.
Undertaking their work which , as I sa.y, iJicl uded a complete review of the system of land tenure and the pract ice of conveyancing including the work of the Deeds Registry, the Committee did come to certain firm conclusions on minor points regarding the working of the Deeds Registry.
Ti1e Committee felt that if certain comparatively minor amendments wer,e made to the Deeds Registry Ordinance it would assist the coll\·eyancing work a nd would speed it up and make it altogether more effi In fl nticipation of Government's cient.

acceptance of the recommendations as to a change in the existing laws and practice, the Committee submitted a clraft Bill on which the present Bill is basecl.
Tne Land Registration Committee in the performance of its work circu the public and particularly lariz.ed members -of the mercantile and banking organisations, ascertaining their views on certain points dealing with the ex isting system and in particular whether they thought the number of advertise mtcnts of transports and mortgages, now required - three time$ - before passing should be reduced to one, and secondly whether or not the time for entering opposition to transports and mortgages, which is now fourteen <lay1s might not with convenience be redaced slightly under that term of time in t h eir order that the clerks could do ,..vork of recording the opposition and have it ready with the t ransport for the Transport Court at the earliest opportunity.
of mortgages AnotiJer question was whether or not canc:elment could with adrnntage be executed before a Notary Public and not before the Regis trar himself.

The replie., reiceived by the Committee accepted those points, namely, that the advertise ments of transports .and mortgages should be red uced from three to one, that the time for entering opposit ion s·i10uld be slightly the reduced.
At in general 2685 Deeds R egistry 21ST JUNE, 1957 ( A mendnient) Bill 2686 [The Attorney General] moment opposition has t o be entered by noon on the third Satur day follow ing t he f irst pubh cation of a transport or mortgage, and the r ecommendation now is that the time for opposition should end at 3.30 o'clock on the after noon of the day before, th.ereuy the opposition time would be r educed from 14 days to mor e t han 13 days.
Also i t was generally accepted tHat l"ancelrnent of mortgages should either be effected before a Notary Public or the Regis trar.

Except for t he reduction in the n umb'er of advertisements of t rans ports and mortgages from three to one, t his Bill seeks to implement particular ly the recommendation of the land Registration Committee on these points.

Government has consider ed the recom mendations whici1 hon.
Members will r ead in paragraph 46 of t his Com m ittee's very abie r epor t, and it is felt that it is in the interest of the com munity that th ese amendments should be made early.

The r eduction in the number of adv.ertisements wo uld occasion amend ing the Rules under tile Deeds Registr y Or dinance, but we are not concerned with t hat in connection with this Bill.

'rhe amended Ru le has been made and in due cour!

::e will be laid on the table of this Council.


Clause 2 of the Bill seeks t o a mend section 16 of the Deeds Registry Or dinance.
That ,sect ion reads: in ''No cancellation of any mortgage shall be of any force or effect or be in any way pleadable or be allowed to be pleaded in any court of justice the Colony, unless it is passed and executed before the Court and filed as of r ecord in the r egistr y, but the provisions of this sec tion shall not affect an y cancellation duly executed and passed in accordance with the requirements of the law in force wh en it is passed.''
\ The "court" means ti1e Transport Court or the Registrar, and includes the D,eputy Registrar.

The cancella tion of mol·tga.ges is a r e4atively un im portant procedure a nd the Committee i-ecommended t hat the systelll would be adequately served e,,en if the cancel ment of rnortgag,es is executed before a Notai·y Pu blic.

This would be lJarti culal"!y appr ec iated in New Amsterdam when .ordinarily the Registrar or De puty Regist r ar has to go once a. month for foat purpose.
There is a Notary Pu blic in New Amsterdam, and anyone who pays off his property instead of haying to wait on the visit of the Registrar or Deputy Registrar or coming t o Georgetown to hm·e the <·ancelment, executed, can have it done at any time in.

Berbice.
Berbice.

the mortgage on There is a new subtlause to be lG whici1 pr.oddes to section .added that wh ere a ny mortgagee has any dis ability or is absent from t he Colony, or his presence cannot be secur e-cl in or der to execute a deed of cancellation of a mor t gage, his mortgage debt haYing been paid, if the Registrar is sat isfied that the del>t has been paid, he may in lhe a bsen1:e of t he mortgagee cancel thP.

mortgage.
mortgage.

There are ti ll1es when the debt which has been secured by a mort gage has been r epaid b ut t he mortgagee is not a Yailable to execute the cancella tion of t he mortgage and t he property r emains encumbered, which is incon venient to the owner of the propei'ty if he s hould want to sell or to raise an other loan on a 11101-tgage, whieh can not be done' so easily if there still exists the paid off rr_iortgage on the register.
Though t he mortgage debt has been paid a nd the mortgagee should die in testate before tile cancellation of the mortgage, it is not possible without some difficulty for some rep.resenta tive to come along and execute the cancelment of the mortgage.

Si~ilarly 2687 Development Funcl 21ST JUNE, 1957 1955 & 1956 ( Appro.)
Bill 2688 where a mortgage is granted to a com pany and the company is wou nd up and cancellation has not bee,n effected there is some difficulty at the momen t in removing the mortgage from the register.

This provision will enable the Registrar to say that the 1:iroperty is fr.ee from the debt which has been paid and .execute the !

!ancelment of the mort gage.

in this way.

T hose are the reasons behind this Bill and :I move that the Bill be now read a second time.
The Financial Secretary: I heg to se~ond the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Clause 3 of the Bill se$kS to ,give effect to the recommendation that the time for entering opposition s hould be 1·educed from 14 days to just ovei- 13 days .
When a transport or mortgage jg published in the Gazette on the Satur day, the time for .entering opposition und er the present system is 14 days, and th.e Rules of Court provide· that oppos ition must be entered by 12 noon on the third Saturday.

What happens, is, if op position is entered the Registrar has to get to work to enter and file t hat oppos ition and have the transport or mort gag.e ready for the Transport Cour t on the following Monday.
By the slight r eduction of time for entering opposition, it wi]] enable the R:egistrar t ime to get through his work s in ~e the volume has increased v.ery considerably.

I understand that before the War there used to be 15 now the number is between 100 and 200. the This prov1s1on giv.es the Registrar time to do his work.
Consequently, if there is s pace between the limit of the time for entering oppos ition and the t ime for the Transport Court, it does giv.e the parties an opportunity to settle difficulties and to remove the cloµd so that the transport or conveyancin,g can tnke effect and the Tram.port Cirnrt can pass the conveyancing withor1t any delay on the fo llowing Monday.

This provis ion is actually in the I Rules of Court, which ar.e made b~, the Jud ges and have to be laid on the table of the Council.
The Chief Justice h as approved of the amendment of the Rule COUNCIL IN COMMITTEE.

Council r esoh-ed itself into Com mittee and passed the Bill as printed.

Council resumed.

'fhe Attorney General : I beg to 1110,·e foat the Bill be now read a third t ime and passed.

The Financial Sec,retary: 1 beg to ~econd the motion.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill read a third t ime and passed .


DEVELOPMENT FUND ( 1955 AND 195G APPROPRIATION) BILL, 1957 T he Fin.ancial Secretary (Mr. Essex) : I beg to move the second r ead ing of a Bill intitule-d: .. An Ordinance to make provision for the Development to the appropriation Fund of certain sums of monev trans ferred the revenues and thereto from funds of the Colony".

This is a very formal Bill.

It is really intended to regularise the position relating to development expenditure from the Colony's own resources.
The De,·elopment F und Ordinance 1954 pro• rides that the F nnd shall include such sums inter alia appropriated by law to the Fund from the r evenues of the Colony.

In 1955 we transferr•°3d the $2,644.579 fr.om general revenue into the Developme:nt Fund to cover expen diture on development projects shown in the Estimates as being financed from Colony r eveinue.

Similarly in 1956 that Legislatiive $4,881,705 be pr ovided from the Gen eral Revenue Balance, foe reserves, to .Council agreed .1 • . '
2689 E xci:;e R egulations 2 1ST JUNE, Hl57 ( A melt.)

Bill 26tl0 [The Financial Secretary] cover part of the expenditure i_n tJ1e Development Estimates.

This Bill is the to give Legislative sanction for a ppropriation of amounts from the Revenue Balance on the Fund to cover the amounts that were actually spent on appr oved projects in 1955/ 1956. these t wo The Attorney General: I beg to second the motf on.

Question put, and agreed to.


Bill read a second time COUNCIL IN COMMITTEE Council r,esolved itself into Com• mittee and pasS'ed the Bill as printed.

Council r es umed.

Mr. Speaker: Bill was published Gazette in t he form of a preamble.

I noticed that t he the Official in The Financial Secretary: I beg to move t hat the Bill be now read a third t ime and passed.

The Attorney G(eneral : I beg to second the motion.

Question put, and agreed t o.

Bill read a third time and passed.


the ya1'i.ous laws we haYe on the sub ject.

But there is now a special ur gency that in the excise laws ther e £110uld be power to provide for su per Yision and contr ol of tne man ufact ur e. I am informed that the local factor y w ill be producing beer in commer c'ial quantities in a matter of weeks.

It is very important t her efore that we should have ,"<:1me legal means of making r egulations to control particu larly the excise aspect::.

as s0011 as possible.


The Excise Regulat ions Ordin ance, Chapter 312, contains the rather more complicated r egulations which we r e devised in connectfon with the breiwery, and the Bill we are now con•• sider ing will enable the Goyernor-in.

Council to make regulations covering a in the wider var iety of things than present Ordinance.

the provisions ar e self explanatury, and I lherefo1·e moye that t he Bill be read a second think all time.
I Mr. Cummings (Member for La bour , Health and Housing): I beg to second the motion.

· EXCISE REGULATIONS BILL (AMENDMEN'l') l\h.

Speaker: Would any member li ke to speak on this Bill ?

The Financial Secretary: This Bill ;s more e~citing than t 'i1,e last one.

We have said -so often in this Council t he words "a s tep in the right direction."

This is a real step in the right direc tion .

In 1955 it wa~ provided that the excise duty on beer should be 50· cents p er liquid gallon.
Unfortunately, h ow ever, foere is no sp.ecial provision in the law as it st ands for excise super vision and control of th e manufacturing of beer.

There is no doubt we shall have to have sooner or later, and prefer ably sooner , a completely new excise law to con solidate and bring up t o date a ll Mr. Correia: I am gla d to hea r t hat Bank Br eweries Limited will be pro ducing beer within weeks.
It is hear t ening t o note that at least one of t he f\everal recently established pioneer ind ustries will be going into pr oduc I wou ld be g lad to hear t.ion rnon.

of others following su it.

Those are t he remarks I wis h to make.

Question put, and agreed tu.

Bill r ead a second t ime.

~ ~ 2691 Post, & Tel.

( Amdt.)

Bill 21ST JUNE, 1957 L. G. Special Prov .

Bill 2 692 Council resolved itself into Com mittee to consider the Bill clause by clau~e, and passed it without amend ment.
Council resumed.

'!

'he The Financial Secretary: Bill having b·een passed in Committee stag,e without amendment, I beg to move that it be now read a third time and passed.

possibility of the Analyst Department finding it necessar y to use such sub stances for analytical purposes.

It is on this g round that this Bill is intro duced.

It is proposed to amend section 29 of the Post and Te;egrapi1 Ordin ance, Chapter 132, and to enact suitable the United regulations modelled on Kingdom legislation.
Mr. Gajraj : I beg to second the motion.

Mr. Cummings: I beg to second the motion .

Question put, and agreed to.

QLtestion put, and agreed: to.

Bill read a second time.

Bill r ead a third time and passed.

CllUNCIL IN COMMITTEE POST AND TELEGRAP H BILL ( AMENDMEN(l') Council r esolved itself into C.om mittee and passed t he Bill as printed.
Mr. l(endall (Member for Com munications and Works ) : I beg to move the second reading of the Bill standing in my name and int ituled: ., An 01·dinance to amend the Post and Telegraph Ordinance."
to 'fhis Bill, with special r eference claus.e 2, seeks to permit the transmis sion by post of radio-acti ve substances in accordance witil and subject to con ditions pres<:ribed in r egulations made under t he Post and Telegraph Ordin ance, notwithstanding t he provisions of section 29 ther eof , or noxious s ub stances by post .
The Government Analyst reported that small a mounts of minerals con t:1.ining r.adio-active constituents have in fai;t been exported from this Colony without s pecial packing by the Geolo .. <i;ical Department, though .not in suf In ficient quantity future Government may wi~h to use these radio-actfve substances for therapy and diagnosis, and also, there is the to be harmful.

Council resumed.

l\fr.

l{endall: t he Bill be read a passed.

I beg to move that th ird time and Mr. Gajraj: I beg to !
'::eco nd th!a\ motion.

· Question put, and agreed to.

Bill r ead a third time and passed.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ( HOPETOWN AND BEL AIR COUNTRY DISTRICTS ) (SPECIAL PROVISIONS ) BILL Mr. Gajraj: On behalf of the hon.
the Member for Local Government, Socia l Welfare and Co-operative Deve l opment (Mr. Farnum) , I be•g to move the second reading of the Bill intituled: ''An Ordinance to provide for the col lection of rates levied by the Hopetown and Bel Air Country Authorities in re~ pect of the year 1956, and to make better 2693 L/J.

( H'Town & B / Air 21ST JUNE, 1957 Country District) Bill 2694 I.M r. Gajrnj] provision for the collection of moneys due to Local Authorities."

The position is very simple.


At the 31st December 1956, there were two Country Authorities, Hopetown Coun try Authority and Bel Air Country Authority and, of co1u·se, by virtue .of of ti1eir constitution, they were entitled to colle'Ct rates and taxes and other revenue.

But as in all such institu tions, collection of rates is not 100 per cent, so at the end of 31st Decem ber 1956 when a n6w Authority came into being there were some outstand the Ordinance ing amounts.
As stands, there is no provision for the Authority which succeeds the old one to demand and collect rates outstand ing and it has become necessary, legislation to be in therefore, for troduced giving joint country authority the right to collect rates which were due and owing to the two old ones ; those which ceased to exist at the 31st De~ember, 1956. to this new That is the main purpose of this Bill before the Council.
In order to avoid the repetition of the same cir cum stances, there is set out in clause 4 of the Bill a provision whereby if in the future one authority is joined with another, it shall be lawful for the new authority to collect ra.tes which may be owing to the two, or more, authorities which ceased to exi st.

The Bill is a simple one.

It is necessary.

I feel s ure Memliers of the Council will agree to pass it, and I do so move.

Mr. Kendall: I beg to second the motion.


Mr. Jailal : Well, I cannot raise objection to the Bill itself, but I feel l should take this opportunity to make ----- this Council aware of the ve ry dif ficu lt situation with respect to this particular country district.

For ~cme years Hopetown was the biggest pro ducer of anowroot in this country.· At the same time, for a long while now, Hopetown suffered from bad drainage facilities and absolutely no irrigation facilities.
I am ashamed to think that the Local Government sees fit to draw money and assess at the rate of $13 per acre lands which lie totally un drained.

It is no use saying it is a is sea defence area because nothing it against.

A large amount of silt has accumulated in front of the villages a nd I know that themselves are attempting to clear their village of this.
the villagers to defend there As I know it, the v,illagers them in an attempt to clear the selves channels are actually digging outside the defences.

I mention it for what it is worth, and I mention it in the hope t h at it would reach the ear s of the Local Government- New districts which never paid any rates have been squeezed I know one private landlord provided the people of Hopetown with all their rice lands for which they paid him a small fee.

He had his own drain age.


Tha t land, together with others, has been drafted wisely or unwisely into a Country District.

this new district.

into Already Hopetown is in a miser able plight and cannot pay the new rates levied.

The position is made extremely difficult; because added to this $13 is a rental of $10.

This means farmers would average the have to pay at the rate of $23 per acre in order to get 15 bags of rice ·1 2695 L.G.
H;T.own & B /Air 21ST JUNE, 1957 Cou,ntry D-istrict ) Bill 2696 I~ is a padi.

ridiculous situation.

Thei·e is no water and the people have to depend entirely on the rainfall fo r their water supply.

The drainage is good in only one section of this whole area from t h e gasolene station at Bu sh Lot to the Hopetown School.

Sir Frank McDavid: May I ask if it is a declared drainage a rea?

themselves, fixes the rates which they cannot pay.


It is the Local A uthority, the Chairma n and Members who fix the rates a nd those rates are then' approv ed by the Local Government Board.

th ink it is misleading to make people feel that an appointed body, oth er than the representatives of the people, f ix the rates which they, t he people, are n ot able to p ay.

I Mr. Jailal: I cannot answer that firmly because I do not t hink it is.
It h as only jus t recently been dee Jared a Country District, and it is a Sea Defence area.

Sir Frank McDavid: I was try ing t o ascertain the reason for the h igh rates.

Miss Collins: I would s uggest that this matter be defe rred.

Mr. Jailal: I do not wish to to the Bill introdu ce any opposition because all it seek s to do is to give authority for the collection of rates, which a re fixed by the Local Govern men t .
Mr. Cummings: I wou ld like to e nquire for the purpose of cla rifica tion what the hon.

Member, Mr. Jailal, mea ns by saying the Local Government h as fixed the rates.

I was under the impression t hat t h e Local fixed Authorities their t hemselves own rates and t he estim ates a re approved by the Local Government Board.

Mr. Jailal: If my understanding of the term "Local Government" is correct no Local Auth ority which is a member of the Local Government Board fixed its rates.
Mr. Cummings: It is misleading for t he reason that it gives t he idea that somebody, other than the people Dr. Fraser: I r is.e to support the hon.

Member, Mr. Cummings.

The Local Authorities fix t heir own rates which are then approv.ed by t he Local Government Board.

Nobody else fixes the r ates.


The Attorney General: I think it wo uld be most unfortunate if this Bill do.es not become law, because a lot of people who have to pay their r ates wou ld be in a precarious position if the Bill is not made law.

I wish Mr. Ramphal: I rise to support the I want to motion before th e Council.

congrat ulate the hon.

Member n ow in ch arge of the Bil[ that even at this late stage he should finall~- get poss ession I am sure h e did it in a very of a B ill. masterly manner.
t his opportu n ity, as w.e ar.e virtually coming to a close.

to draw attention to a wild stat ement an d my objection to it.

The objection is that Government is slowly introducing t he Marshal] Plan t hrough out the country w ithout that Pla n as a document coming before t-his Council and before it has been decided as a policy of t h is Government.
to use - of those t oday I am saying that throughout this us country who h ave ears would hear - there is a strong feeling t hat a policy is be ing put into operation by this Central Government without this Council hav ing debated or decided on the question.

I am sorry the hon.

Member in charge of Local Government is not here in per- 2697 L.G.

H 'Town & B ( Ai?'

21ST JUNE, 1957 C. Dis.

S.P.


Bill 2698 I l Mr. Ramphal] son to hear the cr iticism that is being levelled outside against the initiation of the Mars.iiall P lan.

I know what the think Goyern position is inside.

m ent should come out and tell the people what is happening.

We are mere to complete the Marshall ly Report but that is not understood out side.

after I take t his opportunity, congratulating my hon.
Friend on the handled able way in whici1 he has this Bill, to say what is being said outside abo ut the Marshall Plan.

trying at of the the this ,Council Mr. Gajraj: I would like to take this opportunity to thank hon.

Mem bers · for enlivening the proceedings of stage.

Apparently, we haYe got througi1 our Bills too easily, and this ha :;.

given them joining opportunity h an d s .

Particularly, I want to thank t he hon.

Member, Mr. Ramphal, for his kind refe•rences to me.
May I say ri ght now, I do not myself be lieve foe hon.

Member, Mr. Jailal, was atta cking the principle of the Bill, a,nd I am glad he said so subsequently, be cause as I pointed out in presenting t he motion for the second r eading, t he Bill merely tries to provide the legal machinery for this Loe-al Authority, c1·eated on 1st July, 1957, to collect debt~ which were outstanding to the known predecessors of this Authority which ceased to exist legally on the 31st December, 1956.
That is all we a r e at the moment discussing.

area of Crown Lands which is part of to a priYate estate a nd the one which the hon.

Member particularly is an estate which directs attention was part of the old Authority for many, many ye'ars, but; which, we are told by some curious mischance first the was nen!r rated and for If that is time so, I wouid suggest it may have some r elation to the fut ure of this country the district, but it is not part of consideration of the Bill.

it ha~ been rated.
it ha~ been rated.

All it can ser ve to do is that the appropriate department would take cognizance of the remarks and look point into it .

So far as the raised by the i1on.

Member, Mr. Ram phal, i~ concerned, I am IS:ure his r e marks wou1d r eceiye the attention of the hon.

Member for Local Govern ment, but at t his stage I am s ure appreciate hon., Melllber would the that not the Marshal!
Report was got through in t ime for this Council to discuss it and what is known as 'implemen,rtalfion di the MiairshaJl tfoie Plan.

It is not necessary for me to say any more, and I do ask that t he 111otion be pnt.

Mr. Ramphal: That is exactly what is the wrong impression of the people-there im plementation of a policy of the Plan without thiis any_ aQceptan()e Council.

T he hon.

Mover i's right and thrit is why I said what I did.

is an attempt ed by this Count r y District of The point t he hon.
Member, Mr. J a ilal, raised regarding the inclusion are.~s in which ar e not pa rt of the two seperate distrkts-they were not in existence.

Because the hon.

Member mentioned it, we got an officer of the Local Government Board to giYe -us the It is true that it includes an facts.

Question put, and agr~ed.

to.

Bill r ead a second time.

COUNCIL IN COMMITTEE Council resolved itself into Com mittee and considered the Bill dause lJ,y clause withon't amendment.

~---ICJo"'~~---- 2699 Anima~s (Contro,!


21s r O CTOBER, l %6 of E.1:rmr-iments) BiU 2700 (.

;cuncil r es umed.

l\'lr.

Ga,iraj: I beg to move that this Bill be read a third t ime and passed.

Mr. l{t.>ndall: I beg to :;:eco nd the mutiun.

Ques tion put, and agreed to.

Bill rea.rl a th ird tim e and passed.


ANIMAL S ( CONTROL OF EXPERIMENTS) BrLL Mr. Cummings if, ab our, Health and Hous ing) : beg to move .a Bill intituled: ( M em b er for I tile second rending of ''An Ordinance to regulate the practice living animals, and of experiments on matters in connection therewith.''

I do not think I need dilate on the nece~sity for such a Bill.

The obj ect is really a very h umane one.


It is to E•ns ure when it is n ecessary, a~· it often is, to use live animals for the purpose of experiments that t he person 11nclert:1 king s uch experiments does rn in a manner as p rovided by Jaw-under t he control of the Med ical Department.

out in The experiments a re being ca r t·onformity wifo the d ed the Pnaded R,eg,u la- oif p:rinc'iples tio.ns.
It by -cornsid ered h as been the Secretary of State - and his views have been considered by other Com mon wea lt h authorit ies that we :;:hould be very carefu l about the man ner in which the~.e experiments woul d be performed.

- The Objects and Reason s of t h e Bill set out in detail what are the t hings to be done.
Hon, various t hat a Membe r s will see that clause 3 seek s t o prohibit any perrnn other t h a n a liconsee from performing a n experi licensee must per ment, and forn1 any experiment in accordance \I' i th the t erms of his licence.

Clause to prevent the performance 4 seeks attainling ,lily of nrnn ual skill.
experiment for th e conditions Clause 5 seeks to permit the per fo rma nce of exp e1·iments for illustra ti ng feat ures s ubject to certa'in condi tion::;, while l'la use 6 seeks to prohi bit t h e performan ce of any experi and except for the' purposes ment s ubject out set to t herein.
When one looks at the Biill he would see that there is provision the grant of a for ( in ,;p ecial pe rm it to pe rform an ex11eri me nt without a dministerling a n aes t hetic t o an animal or without k illing the animal before r ecovers from th e infl uence of s u ch a n aesthetic.

I do not think it is n ecessary for me tCI say anything- more a b out the Bill.

d aus1:1 9.)

it Sir Frank McDavid: I beg to sevond t h e motion.

in ii<-enl'e in Dr. Frase r: this Colony.


What I do not think t he Object s a.nd Rea's.ans of thh: Bil!

a re cle.a1·.

So far as I know, ex Ycry on pe ri 1nents ,1 r e not ca n-ied ou t I an imals wo uld like t o know , h ow ever, is if a medical practitioner has to take out is the case wh ere i1e a dia gn osing- a disease C'alling for t h e inocula tion of an animal.

To my it, would not be fa ir for th is mind, It is a Bill to a pply to such a person.
matter of rou tine in the diagnosis Qf cer tain diseases that one has got to r es,ort t o a.nimal inoculation, a nd it would not be fair for a medical officer or a veterinary s urgeon t o have to take out a licence to do s o under this Bill.
Ref.er ence , h as been made herein to the ~ 2701 Aninutl (Control of 21ST JUNE, 1957 Experiments) Bill 2702 [Dr. Fraser ] question of performing an experiment :£or the purpose of illust rating a lecture, a nd here again I would like it to be made quite clear th at if a medical off icer or a veterinary surgeon wants to do so it should not be necessary for him to take out a licence under this Bill.
As a matter of fad, I do not think that the Medical Department, the including hospitals, is awar e of the Bill.

Mr. Cummings: I think there is a difference between an .experiment ~nd the kind of treatment (to animals) that the hon.

Member (Dr. Fraser) is speak I do not regard the inocu~ ing about.

lation that Dr. Fraser speaks about, as an experiment.
I have been looking into certain things recently when we had a medical expert usin.g mice and so on for experiments, but I think that is quite different from what Dr. Fraser is I am not in a pos ition to s ay saying.

h owever that the on!.\' definition of "experiment" is one which means that an experiment is calculated not to cause any pain.

My interpretation of this is that it is limited to guinea pigs especially - domestic animal.s suitable for that purpose.

a guinea pig, for instanc,e.:...


it would be necessary for me take out a licence ?

too Mr. Cummings : My an's'wel' would be "yes".

· I 'l'he Attorney General: t hink that would be something to the animal that might not be for its good.

I do not think there would be any objection to an inject ion or an op,eration that is intended to benefit the animal.

to do Mr. Cummings: I am grateful to the Attorney General, but I do not, agree with the view expressed.
It is not the stick of itself that the injec.tion matters, to my mind, but the fact that he (Dr. Fraser) must be granted per mission so.

that the arn,wer to hils question is "yes": he would have to take out a licence.

I clo not think a11ybody else would be allowed to carry on such an experiment, and Dr. Fraser would have to do it in the proper way.

Gover nment does not bring these Bills before the Council without getting the advice of people who know.
feel I and has been adopted The Attorney General: T his legis lation is based on United Kingdom leg islation in Jamaica and other West Indian terri I think the idea behind this is tories.

to differentiate between an ,experiment of this natu r e and an op(:lr11tion.

If an experiment is performed with an animal it may not be for the g ood of the animal, but for rnme other purpose - not neces_sarily for t he good of the a11imal itself.

Mr. Speaker: Will the hon .

Dr .


Fraser giv.e the Council some idea of What he fears with regard to hims.elf as a veterinary surgeon ?

Dr. Fraser: I am trying to find out whether, if I wi&h to diagno~e a disease and having to use a rabbit or Mt.

Ramphal: We all know that Dr. Fraser is a V,eterinary Surgeon, and I think he should be particularly disturbed about this clause-to know that he will have to take out a licence in the cir,cumstances r eferred to.
Mrs. Dey: One does not need to visit Berbice to know that Dr. Frase\' is a Veterinary Surgeon, and I do not see why it ~hou ld be neces1sar y for hlim to take out a licence to practise the profession which he went abroad and studied, and returned later to serve the Government for s.even years.

Mr. Ramphal: I am afraid hon.

Member is missing the point.

t he Mr. Cummings : Mr. Speaker, I am rising to a point of order.

I - ------ -~--· ~ - 2703 Animal (Control of 21ST JUNE, 1!
)57 Exper·iments) Bill 2704 Mr. Speaker: We are not in Com mittee yet.

that is the case, all doctors will have to take out a special licence.

Mr. Cummings: On a point of ord.er.

!\fr.

Speaker: I t hink you h ad bet ter i.:over y our point in yom· repl,,·.

M r. Cummings: I think J have already replied.

Mr. Sp eaker: Then somebody else will sp.eak on the point.

i\'Ir.

Jailal: I wanted to know from the hon.

Member what is going to h ap pen in terms of the cla use~ an d so fo r th.
I feel t h e obj ect of t his Bill fa to allow the Goven:ment Bacteriological D<.

:!part tu cond ud experiments of this menL type a.s freely as it wishes.

But we ha ve to consider that in places like the laboratory at Queen's College toads are cfo;se:ted irom time to time in science elnsses.

Will the Rill affect such activity?


Jf a horse is s uffering from a certain type of di ~ease and a vet wants tu try out a cer tain serum on that an imal and he u ::;es on e of the guinea pigs one can f ind a ll ove r t he place, d u you mean to tell me he m ust take out l s he not a licen ce for t h at purpose?

licem.ed enough that , a s a doctor?

to do If a layman was seeking to do that, then I can well understand the ne.ces s ity for a licence.
But the doctor i ~ mak ing life safer by his exper iments, and I cannot r e;illy under stand why any doctor should take out a spe~ ial licence I f.eel this sor t of to do curative work.

prov1s1on should apply to a medical doctor , because he tries out a Jot of th ings on poor vertebrates like myself.

If he has at hand a new antibiotic, he may tr_y it out on you and then yo u owe him, though h e is not s ure about it.

If .
If .

- it to is no fee attached Mr. Gaj raj: May I point ou t that the· just gives perm is ther,e licence sion to persons who have certain qualifications, knowledge a nd abil ity to perform this type of experiment.

In other words, as I see it as a lay man, it preve-nts p eople from indis criminately doing to animals th is sor t of experimentation which might r·esult in, Jet us say, a complete absen ce of a particular type of animal.

J.\ilr.
J.\ilr.

Cummings : I readily admit th ere is a cT:egree of merit in t.he h on.

Member's objection.

My own view is, that it is a slightly abs urd position that a group of laymen s h ould licence someon e who is p rofessionally quali fi,ecl to do a certain act.
But not all doctors - go in for research work, a nd while it might b~ irksome and fa r cical for a su r geon licensed for this, there are to .several other doctors on whom it is necessary that an eye shou ld be kept in matters like this- in fact, very few - !Je It is very difficult to bring about this legislation just exempting a small section of th.e p r ofession, but it is m y desire to see this humane Bill made law, apart from t h e fac t t h at it is something that is done by a n um b e r of England, Jamaica and others.
countriies - civilized I may add this: not ever yth ing t h e Secretary of State invites u s to do is clone by us merely out of his think for our ipse clixit.. W.e mus t selves and sometimes we cannot do wh at is suggested at al l. But the Secretary of State s ays on this matter: " .

..

The r eplies to my circular savingram under reference show that in Colonial territories generally there is no specific ' .

2705 Animal (Control of 21ST JUNE, 1957 E xperiments) Bill 2706 [Mr.

Cummings.]
Cummings.]

legislation limiting the practice of ex periments on living animals to those per sons licensed to perform them.

I consider it to be important that such experiments should b e subject to proper control by legislation and, in reply to a further Par this subject, I liamentary question on have therefore undertaken, in view of the position revealed by the replies to to invite Governments to my circular, give consideration introducing such legislation.
to I consider it to be important that the main provisions in this Act, which relate to the control of experiments on liv ing animals by means of a licensing system, should be adopted wherever possible .

.

. "

As I have said, it is not who saill it that matters, hut what is said.

This is a gradual processing after parliamentary qu.estionin,g and after locally, and our discmsion of Director of Medical Services feels we \vere juf tified in putting thi's legisla tion forward.
it Mr. Speaker: Surely a qualified man should not ask permission to do what he is qualified to do.

COUNCIL IN COMMITTEE Council resolved itself i1i to Com mi ltee to consider the Bill claus e by claus e. Clause 3-lnte•rp i•eitati,m Mr. Ramphal: This clause really puts the matter in a nu tshell.

In other words, it is a humanitarian mov.ement .

We ar.e saying there shall be no ex peri ments at all, but if an experiment is to be carri.ed out, it should be done by a licens.ee.
The Governor in Council will decide who a re to be those people and they will be pr operly train.eel to carry out such experiments.

r t hink that is the proper per spective t o look at it.

Claus es 3 t o 13 passed as printed.

Claus e 14-Penalty.

Mr. Speaker: The clause s ays - ''.

.

.

upon conviction thereof e,hall be liable to a fine of $240 or to imprisonment for any term not exceeding six months or to both such fine and such imprisonment."

It is a s·pecific penalty.


Mr. Cummings: The Bill means to do what it says.

He should not be exempted.

Any person who is going to perform .experiments on a living animal must be licensed to do so.

As far as doctors are concerned, it is an automatic application the Licensing Authority without any ques tions being a sked or conditions im posed; but, a s far as the lay people are concerned, there may be impoo:ed a number of conditions.
the Director or to I think I see the point my friend think it is highly is making, s till I desirable we should go fu r ther with this non-controversial Bill.

(La,1,1,ghte~·).

Question put, and agre·ed to.

Bill read a s,econd time.

Mr. Cummings: It would appear that the word "liable" is capable of con stru ction which is rather fl.exible.
I am rather aware of a decided bush rum appeal cas e in which the Court found that the Magistrat e was bound by the provision which contained the same word·s used here.

I propoee, however, t o amend it to s ay ·· liable to a fine that not exceedi11g $240".

will meet the caee.

think I Question put, and agreed to.

CJ,ause 14, a s amended, passed.

Clause 15 passed a s printed.

Council rernmed.

Mr. Cummings: I beg to move that time · and third this Bill be read a passed.
2707 B enefits for 21ST JUNE, 1957 Govt.

House Empl01Jees 2708 -1 Sir Frank McDavicl: I beg to sec ond the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill read a thir.d ti me and passed.
SUPERANNUATION BENEFITS FOR GOVERNMENT HOUSE EMPLOYEES The Chief Secretary: I beg to move t he following motion standing in my name on the Order Paper- " Whereas the salaries and wages of the domestic employees employed at Govern ment House were provided for in the Estimates since 1955 and such employees thereupon became Government employees entitled in accordance with the rules for such bene fits; and superannuation ben1dits to W h e r e a s prior to 1955, ~,hr, said employees were not entitled to such snper annuation benefits; and Whereas the Finance CommittE:e of the Legislative Council at a meeting held on '3rd January, 1955; had agreed th:..t the service of such employees prior to 1955, should be treated for superannuation pur poses as if such service had been with the Government; Be lt i·esolved: That this CouncH ap broves of the service prior to thP.
1st January, 1S55 of persons employed as domestic employees on and after that date at Government House being deemed to be service with the 1G-overnme:'lt so that such service may be included in calculating the superannuation ben!

'fits to he paid to such employees on their re tirement in accordance with the P.xisting rules governing such awards approved by Council by Resolution No.

LII of the 6th July, 1951 as amended by Resolution No.

LVI of the 8th May, 1957".


This is a formal resolution to im plement a decision of Finance Com mittee taken las t year.

Before 1955 all the -employees of Government House wer e paid from the Allowances of the Government.

Th-ey were not Government employees.

In 1955 they became Govern ·ment employees and are now paid from Government funds, alth_r..,; gh t h e Gov- emor will contribute towards a portion of this the cost.
The purpose of r e.solution is to enable those employees who are serving on and after the 1st of January, 1955, to obtain superannuation benefits.

As I s ay, it has been agr.eed by Finance Committee, and this is a formal r esoluti on to ratify it.

I beg to mov.e the r.esolution.

Mr. Cummings: I beg to second the motion.

I wish to record the view that this is a very necessary and desirable step rn far as domestics a re concer.
!led, and I am hoping that this Legislature would approve of steps being taken by the Adminis tration of this Colony to put them in a s imilar position to public .servants.

One hopes that many em ployers of domestic servants have taken this as an example and do some thing for t hese people w ho work for them and for whom very little is done.

Mr. Ramphal: May I state that this r esolution appears to restrict the date from whirh the 'l'ight to these super annuation benefits would exist.
Ther.e ar,e certain people who r etired la.st y.ear, and .some matters relating to them were brought before the Finance Committee.

I was hoping t hat the res_olution would have included one particular person and the referring particularly Governor's chauffeul' who I t hought had retii"ed before 1955.

This resolution puts t he matter in the right perspec tive.
to I FfSHERIES REGULATIONS DEFERRED Mr. Speaker: The next item (12) is · a motion by t he Member for Agri culture for the approval of Fisheries and (Licences) Regulations, U>57, FisherieE (Marketing) Regulations, 1!)57.

.

i Sir Frank McDavicl: I think this item ,got on the Order Papel.'.

a little in advance of time and I would t herefore I only gave ask that it be def.err,ed.

2709 Fisheries Reg.

Deferred 21ST JUNE, 1957 Marriage ( Amdt.)


Bill 2710 [Sir Frank McDavid] notice of it yesterday and I am not quite ready to go ahead today .

Item deferred.

.
Item deferred.

.

MARRIAGE (AMENDMENT) BILL The Chief Secretary: I beg tu move the second reading of the Bill intituled : have a feeling of r,esentment because whenever they wish to mar-ry in accord anc,e with the reli gious rites, in order to get that marriage registered they have to continue to obtain a certificate which dubs them as immigrants, and unless a change is made their childr.en and their children's children will have to do the same thing.
Ii< ''An Ordinance further to amend the Marriage Ordinance."

Within the last 30 years several at tempts have he.en made to introduce changes in the law relating to the marriag.e of Hindoos and Muslims.

The first attempt, I think, was made at the instance of the Indian leaders in 1921.

This Led to the drafting of a Bill wh ich was called the Hindu and Muslim Marriage Bill.

By 1927 that Bil!
By 1927 that Bil!

was still in draft and a Committee called the Asiatic Marria,g.e Committee was ap pointed to consider and prepare a new draft.

Ten y,ea,rs later the Bill was still · in draft, and so it went on.

to dispense with rnppose the obvious remedy I the wou ld be imp,ediment certificate altogether, but there are still a number of original im migrants Iivin:g here, and for the time being there ar.e good reasons adminis tratively why that certificate should be retained.
About two years ago the pres ent Government decid,ed that it was time a comprehensive Marriage Orrlinance was introduced to cover the residents of irres,pectiv,e of their British Guiana religion.

That proposal was examined by a special Committee and it was fin all.v concluded that the time was still not ripe for introducing such an Ordin ance.

The Hindoos and the Muslims seemed to have wanted changes in the law, but they have never been able to agree what those changes• should be .
De spite the many differences which have existed and still exist.

I think there is general agreement between the parties that thei·e is one matter which should be r-emedied and that is, a means should be found to abolish the non-impediment c-ertificate which is required to be ob tained under Indian Marriage Ordinance.
the This c.ertificate was required- by the original Immigration Ordinance of this country for valid -reas ons but, un fortunately, the requirement of the law went further and it imposed the obli ,gation of obtaining this certificate not only o-n the original immigrants but also on the descendants in :perpetuity.
I think that it Guianese of the third and fourth gener atiQn~ wh9 a.re descend~d from Indians understandable very is to decided The Government and Hindoos according felt, however, that although this advice must J.?e ac it had the responsibility to cepted provide now a more up-to-'date means to for Mu.slims to get m a r r i e d It was their own r eligious rites.

therefore introduce this Bill and, at the same time, to leave undisturbed the provisior,s of the Indian In this way Mus Labour Ordinance.
lims and Hindo.os would be given alter native methods whereby the,y can get married, and it is entirely up to them to decide which method to adopt.

The two methods intention should be allowed to run concurrently for a period and in the light of experi ence we can see which one is preferred.
If people show that they prefer one mefood, the other can then be dis- :pensed with, is that these · ;j ,j 2711 Marriage 21ST JUNE, 1957 ( Amenclment) B-ill 2712 When I gave notice of the introduc tion of this Bill you, Sir, kindly ad vised me to proceed with caution, and I am thus grateful to you for that ad vice, for, as you said, the questions which eoncern the personal law of the individual are very difficult and must be dealt with, with great delicacy.
Your Honour wilJ recall that when I stated the objects of this Bill, I said that I would not proceed with undue haste and that I w.ould provide the opportun ity for anybody who wanted to see me to make representation about the Bill.

That, Sir, I :iia,·e done.

On Monday last, 17th June, I met representatives of three Hindu organi sations and four Muslim organizations.
I do not wish to hide anything from this Council, and the.refore I will say that the majority of straight away those present expressed opposition to the Bill.

Having made that statement Your Honour may be wondering why I am now proceeding with the second reading of the Bill.
I ,am doing so be cause although the majority of those persons expressed disagreement with the Bill I am, and the Governme11t are, by no means convinced that t he reasons which were put for w,ard for opposing the Bill, with one exception, were really sound ; and indeed I should say that the reaso.ns were so varied that one could say that there was no united opposition the Bill on common ground.
I should a lso add tilat I have r eceived several letters from religious organizations telling me that they sup port the Bill whole-heartedly.

Those organizations, or some of them at least, were not r epresented at the meeting.

to The hon.

lVLember, Mr. Sugrim Singh, was present at the meeting and indeed ~1e ·w.ould not argue with me if I describe him as the principal spokes man for the 'opposition.'
I have no .doubt we shall he hearing from him later in this debate, but hope he will forgire me if I attempt to summarize the four main points he made at that meeting.

First of all, he claimed that Hindoos and Mmlims who came to this country 'Under the indenture.
system understood they would be allowed to cn ny on the,ir ways of life in accord' ance with their perrnnal law&, and h e said that the enactment of the Indian Labour Ordinance and particularly the carrying out of Hindu .and ·Muslim mar riage ceremonies were in confo1·mity !.¥ith fti1,is p-rin_bipfa.

Secondly, he claimed that any changes in the existing law as it affects Hindoos and Mm,lims must be initiated by Hindoos and Muslims themselves.
Thirdly, he said the Government, no matter how good its i~tentions-and I would like to mention he said our intentions were good ~ was insuffi in Hindu and Muslim ciently yersed matters to introduce a Bill of this kind, and that it did not i1ave consultations with Hindu and Muslim organizations before preparing the Bill.
Lastly, he said that the Indian Labour Ordinance was antiquated and sh.ould be brought up to date; that while there was need to keep pace with changing conditions, foe Bill I wns bringing forward in this Council was unsuitable.

Mr. Singh's first point, is, I think, the most important because it refers to a misconception on which most of the opposition rests·.
If in fact Govern ment were to interfere in any way with the personal laws of the individual it would be a very serious matter in deed, but my conviction 'is that there is no interference whatever.

As I said the Government is diofag before, all is to introduce an .alternative method of getting married for Hindoos and Muslims.

There is no compulsion on 2713 Ma1-ria,ge 21ST JUNE, 1957 ( Amenclment) Bill 2714 [The Chief Secr etary J anybody to use this method.
The ex isting law, which is in force today, will remain.

Life can go ,on unchanged for t hose who wish it so.

It is as though t her e was a building w,i1ich has a stair way.

It is decided to put in a lift but the stairway is retained.

Those who wish can continue to walk up the stair way, but those who decide to use the new contrh·ance can use the lift.

t hirty-six years there two I will take Mr. Singh's next points together.
As I haYe said, during have tile last the been several att empts to amend }Iindu and Muslim marriage law, and the haYe failed is beef!

use no one has ever been organiza able to get all the various tions to agree.

t he attempts reason why they would If one accepts that only Hindoos a nd Muslims can bring forward any amendment of the law, that is tanta mount to saying never bring for ward any amendment of the law.
To say that foe Government h as is not sufficiently not consulted, and Yersed in these matters to be able to bring fo r ward a law like t his, is a lso quite untrue. '

, t There is a wealth of information on Government files acqu ire<l during the year s on this subject, and Govern ment is fully aware of every viewpoint.

That is the reason why w,e l:ave de cided not to proceed with a compre hensive Ordinance at time.
the present I should now like to turn to the Rill itself au,d mention one important amendment I shall move in Committee.

.ef the Bill provides that a Clause 3 marriag~ :Officer who professes either the Islamic or Hindu religion and who ,s ole~m:i~es a !1.larriage Jn _a~~9rdance I l the mo£t is probably with the Ordinance can solemnizP.

110 other form of m a r r i a g e. con That tentio us clause in the Bill.

Cert ainly that was made very clea r to me last Monday.
The pundits and moulvis this were deeply con...:erned about clause a nd what effect it would h ave on them.

Their problem is that if they seek appointment as marriage officers under this Bill, they would be pre cluc\ed from solemni zing any other marriages, and that would put them in a very d'ifficult position.

I think the pundits are in a very peculiar pos ition, as I understand, that according to the Hindu faith there are family priests.
They pointed out that if the same members of a fanuly decided to marry under this Bill and others de cided to Indian Lalfour Ordinance, the famil y priestll would be in a difficult position.

temain under the Gover.nment has recognized this difficulty, and with Your Honour's permission I propose in t he Committ'ee stage to move a small amendment which, I hope, would go a good way towards rectifying that position.
The effect of th.e amendment will be to enable marriage officers to perform marriages both under the Marriage Or dinance and under the Indian La bour Ordinance.

So priests of the Hindu and Islamic religions will be able to solemnize marriages under both laws but they will not be allowed to solemnize unregistered marriages.

Another point in connection with this clause which was brought out is, how will Government know whether persons are rnitable for appoint ment as marriage officers?
T hat is easily answered.

Any responsible Gov ernment would make the most careful inquiries befor e appointing anyone a s a ma rriage officer.

If a perso.n befongs to a particular religious organization.

2715 Marriage 21ST JUNE, 1957 ( Amendment) Bill 2716 ·• - .

.

\ Government would inquire from tha c organization whe ther that person is If fit and proper to be so appointed.

he is, what is termed "independent.''


in a r eligious sense, then Government would make inquiries in the area from which he came and satisfy itself be yond any doubt that he is a fit and proper person before appointing him as a marriage officer.

I do not think i t is necessary or· very practicable to I think write all this down in the law.

i t is a reas onable presumption that Gov,ernment would do that.
The next important provision wh ich in fact affects the entire popu lation, Christians as well as Hindoo::; is clause 6 of this and Muslims, Ma rriage (Amendment) Bill, whic'.1 provides the minimum ages for males and females for marriage - 16 for males and 14 for females.

I do not think there is much dispufo about those ages.

One Hindu organisation had mentioned they thought the figta·es.

high, but on the other hand the hon.


Member, Mr. Sugrim Singh, who did some research on the subject, informed us that recently in India the ages had been raised to 18 and 16 respectively.

I think everyone would agree that it is desirable to h ave some form of minimum age written the Jaw.

There i.s none in the Marriage Ordin ance.

in Hon.
in Hon.

Members will also notice that there is a subclause which enables a female who becomes pregnant b efore the age of 14 to apply by p etition to the Chief Justice for permi::;s ion to get married before that minimum age and, if necessary, to be married to a male of under 16 years.

In :::lause 9 are set out requ'.isites of a valid marriage contracted under this Bill according to the rites of the Hindu It is significant or Is lamic religion.
that although Government is accused of lack of knowledge of these matters and faili.ng to consult all the organisa tions, at my recent meeting with the l'eligio us representatives, no reference was made to t hese requisites.

Thley were not challenged at all.

I think in that case it is reasonable to assume they are not objectionable and should be accepted.
Lastly, there is clause 12 which enables persons who are already mar ried according to the rites of the Hindu or Is lamic religion, to havie their marriages registered under this new law, provided they obtain exemp tion from the Indian Labour Ordinance a nd their marriages with in 12 months of the date of enact ment of this Bill.

register they the most Those are or Hindu important q1testions.
As I have already said, the provisions of this amending Bill will enable Hindoos and Muslims to marry under the same Ordinance as everyone else.

And incidentally, the Bill also enables persons professing the Muslim religion who do not come from India to marry according• to, tJheir r~lig,ious, r~tes and to get their marriages registered.

At the present moment they cannot do I have said, this Bill is {orcing so.

nothing on anybody.
nothing on anybody.

The community may take advantage of it if t h ry wish, or may ignore it if they wish.

I move that the Bill be now read a second time.

The Attorney General: I beg to second the motion.

Mr. Sugdm Singh: It is rather unfortunate that Government has decid ed to proceed with this Bill which seeks to amend the substantive Marriage Or dinance, Chapter 164, to include Hindu and Muslim marriages, and also to in clude the Hindu and Muslim priests as J ~ .. ~ .
, ; ; : : - 2717 Marriage 21ST JUNE, 1957 ( Amendrnent) Bul 2718 in bringing this amendment [Mr. Sugrim Singh] marriage officers.

I want to say at t he outset, as stated by th e hon.

Mov,er of this Bill, that the intention of Gov,ern ment is undoubtedly good, but I do say that this amendment doe.s not even touch, much less heal, the burning question which for the last .31 years ha.s been occupying the attention of Government and of both the Hindu and Muslim population in t his Colony.
As stated by y.ou, Sir, thi.s matter of amending and bringing up to date the marriage laws aff.ecting Hindoos and Muslims is not an easy one.

One of the things to which I gav.e priority when I went to India was an inquiry into the marriage Jaws of India, so as to f ind out how much information I could col lect and place before H indu and Muslim organizations in thi.s Colony, to assist in solving this difficult matter.
I found after consultation with the Jaw officers ,attached to the Government of India that there are no enactments b;earing directly on this problem, and if I may be permitted I will r ead the third para graph of a letter I received from the Ministry of External Affair s in India, at th1e hea d of which is Pandit Nehrn.

lt says : ''We have no statutory provision re-· garding Muslim marriages" For the first time in the history of India divorce is permitted, by the Hindu Marriage Act, No.
25 of 1955, and befor.e this Act t here was no pro vision for divorce under Hindn law in India.

A very representative Com mitte,ia of head men sat and as a re s ult pr,ovision wa-s made fo r divorce.

It might interest hon.

Members to know th at there is no provision fo1, divorce under Hindu law, and alJ of this is relevant because there wer e no divorced wives and as the women could not ma rry they were faced with a life-career of ostrncis.m.
It was realised that while this law might have suited ancient days every .one could not sit down and wor ship the inequity a,nd, quite rightly, pro vision for divorce was made Eor the first time.

I fully appreciate the fact that the Ind,ian Labour Orclin:mc-e has ser ved its time an d purpose un der the old system of indentm·eship, but in thes•e more modern days immi g rat ion is a matter of history and the Ordinance cannot hold water or meet the requirements of thie younger generation.
Educated and other peoplie among us are now alive to t h eir rights and f eel some degre,e of opprobrium when told of what they must experience under th>~ Or dinance-appear before a Justice of the Peace to get a non impediment certificate and things like that-facing- all thie attendant evils in the matter.

Let us examine what the proposed 8mendment seeks to do.
So far as I know there are two systems of mar r iage under th e Labou r Ordinance and it is possible fo r a man to marry Hnd register his marriagje on the same day he r eceives a non-impediment cer I think it is regrettable that tificate.

even in these enlightened days we still have Hindoos and Muslims among us who insist that th)3y are n ot going to h ave thefr children legally married.
The the a rrangements havje been concluded for a wedding the bridegroom's par ents a lso agree that the couple should not be legally married.

I have a lready stated - without casting aspersions on any particular per son- th at this system merely amounts to a tria l mar r iage whereby the man the woman to live with him and if she meets his satisfaction in a ll as pects, then he d;ecides wheth er he would ma rry her.
that after all result takes is 27H) Marriage 21ST JUNE, 1957 ( Amendment) Bill 2720 ' I want to say h ere and now that I stick my neck out on this.

I shall never compromise in any way which the painful would help to p€rpetrate and the disgraceful practice, in these enlightened days, of allowing mar riages to be contract-ed by young people when those marriages are to tally illegal.

The time for this prac tice is past.


Marriages must be brought up to the general standard, in conformity with the general mar riage laws of the Colony.

To put it in a negative way, no Muslim or Hill d u marriage must b'e contracted in this Colony unless it is lawful.

I say that in the face of opinion expressed by people who are orthodox only on occasions and who do not practise what they preach.
to this point, Coming back I would like to see introduced such an amendment as would put an end com ,pJ,etely to the obsolete Indian La,bour Ordinance and bring all marriages on the same plane, with certain pro\.·i sions to accommodate the plersonal law of Hindoos and Muslims: I am agair1st this question of choosing to get a marriage registered.

I want to see it made compulsory.


Govfernment is evading this with good reasons - to avoid the criticism of a certain sec tion of people who write letters on the subject.

But I would remind Gov ernment that in no country is legis lation of this nature introduced with unanimous approval.

In this country the East Indian population is nearly fifty per cent.

Among the Hindoos are two s·ections the Aryan Samajs (who have their - college in D'Urban Street) and the Sanatans (who meet in Lamaha Str eet).
I met the leaders of both sections and, as hon.

Members have seen in tfoe Press, they decided unanimou sly to put an end to illegal marriages.

More than seventy-five per cent.

of the Muslim:.

are in favour of h av ing legal marriages, but there is a .small group who hold the view t hat these marriages should not be made lawful, and they rely on Mohamedan law.
To throw some light on this, I would like to quote from D. F. Mulla's book, " Principles of Moham/edan Law'' (11th Edition ) , at chapter XIV; sec tions 194, 198 a nd 198A : is defined "Marriage (nikah) to be a contract which has for its object the procreation and the legalising of chil dren .

.

.

Marriage according to Mohame dan law is not a sacrament but a civil contract .

.

. "

In Muslim law, '· A Mohamedan may have as many as four wives at the same time, but not more.
If he marries a fifth wife when he already has four, the marriage is not void but irregular-" .

.

. "

It is not law ful for a Mohamedan woman to have more than one husband at the same tune.

A marriage with a woman, who has her husband alive and who has not been divorced by him, is void."

It was al'gued that if the Mohame dan law allowed four wives, how could this be made to fit in with English law which accepted only a monoga mous form of marriage.
In English law the first marriage is legal and others contracted while a spouse in that marriage is a live are bigamou1s.

As I have said before, the Hiu tloos have seen fit to change the laws in.

India to meet with the changing times.

In Trinidad there is a spiecial Ordinance fol' Hindoos and a special Ordinance for Muslims.

The hon.

the Attorney General can bear me out In Surinam it is the same.

on that.
on that.

The point I am making is that Gov ernment instead of introduc.ing this 2721 MarriaJge 21ST JUNE, 1957 ( Amenclment) Bill 2722 amending Bill should face the entire issue and come out with a complet€ scrapping of the Indian Labour Ordin ance as there is no immigrant now living.

Let us compare the marriages under the Indian Labou1· Ordinance and those under this proposed amend ing Bill.
U nder the Indian Laboul' Ordin anc\e one goes to the Immigration Department and gets a fo rm which he fills in giving certain particulars.

Section 142, su bsection ( 1) of the Ordinance provides that befor e a mar r iage is contracted the parties must fin:t obtain a certificate signed l:ly the Immigration Agent-General to the ef fect that t here does not appear on the records of the D;epartment any im pediment to the marr iage.
The mar riage is not deemed to b~ contracted unless that certificate is obtained.

On the same day one can O'btain the certif icate and contract the mar riage.

On t he oth·er hand under this amending Bill the co:itracting parties have to give notice to the Registrar's Office for three weeks ancl if there ii:; no objection within that period then a certificate is iss1ued before that mar- 1;iage can take place.
On the one hand you hav-e the facility of obtaining the certificate in one day and on the other hand you h ave to wait three weeks to obtain the certificate.

Secondly, we have- the curious ano I:adian Labour maly that under the Ordinance a boy must be 15 yea-rs and a girl 14 years of age before they can marry and their marriage registered under the Ordinance.
Under the fo dia:i Labour Ordinanc·e if a girl is un der the age of 14 and finds herself enciente and desires to he married she can without the expenditure of money go t o the Immigration Agent-General who is authorized b,v law to g,rant her pe1~mission to marry.

Under this amend- illg Bill she has to make application to .the Chief Justice in chambers and put a rgume11ts before forward very good her application is granted.
My poiilt is, while I strongly nd vocate that these special facilities or peculiar practices must be brought in line with the genera] man-iage laws of the Colony, time has not come when we must completely J1ave no r e gnl'(l or we must disrespect completely those special faci lities which have been provided under the India:i Labom· Or dina11ce.

the to go before Under the Indian Labour Ordin ance parties ca,n go ,before a M:agis trnte to obtain a divorce, otherwise they would have the Supreme Cou-rt.
This amending B iil seems to be what I descr iibe as a dual system leav-ing the Mus lims and the H i ndoos to choose which road they wish to tread.

1 am completely against any dual system.

The hon.

the Chief S'ecretary has indicated the inte:ition of Govemment is to meet one situation by allowing a ma-rriage officer und-er this -amending Bill to also m arry under the India:i Labour Ordina,nce.

Why is Govemment just scratching on the surface of this problem?
I can only say they would not like to hurt or interfere or exer cise any direct as to the question of having the marriages com pulsorily registered.

influence At the me·eting on Monday last there were t hree Hindu organizations and there were Mu slim organization s, and I want to say for the information of the hon.

Mover that those organiza tion s, unanimously t hrough their dele gates, asked Government not to purrne this amending Bill.
They are responsible and practically the only Hindu and Muslim organizations in this country.

2723 Marriage 21ST JUNE, 1951 ( Amendment) Bill .2724 I only wish to ask Government not to pursue this Bill.

One only has to get in touch with the leadillg Muslim priests and he would ,be told that they have actua,lly prepared a Bill which they have bformed Government about, and they are asking Gov-erument to c:o,nsider it in the hope that it would be In such a satisfactory to all sides.
controversial matter as this, I think it · would be well to examine a ny Bill intendeu to be intro duced loca.Jly in the light of tlLe simiht!'

Ordinances in Surinam, Trinidad and other neighbouring eolonies.

for Governme:it settlement Perhaps it would be saicl that we have been discussing this question for many years and that there is no hope of a the foreseeable in future, but that is not the point.
These peop.Je (Hind:oos and Muslims) have actually got a draft Bill prepared which might solve the situation in a manner suitable to them.

Government would be in the position that if a:-iy if any hardships arise t himg ha.ppens - they would be able to from the Bill - say thiat the Bill is tire choice of these people themselves but it is subject to :i.mendment.
I am awa.re of the fact tha.t the Chief Secretary has been asked to table this amendment, ·but I think iit would be more advisa:ble to get oae compre hensive or two sep,a,rate Bills - one for Hindoos and one .

for Muslims - in order to bring everything up t o stan dard under the Marriag.e Ordinance.

It that one Bill only is not desirable it is going to should -be introduced; cause mo1·e controversy t han Govern ment ca111 anticipate.
F-or three years there have be·en different sha-des of opinion on this question, and I ask Government whether there has oeen any single organization asking for an amendment of this• nature.

Even be fore I became a professional lawyer I had a lot to do with this.

matter.

As I sroncl here I speak for the delegates of a certain organization who attended the Conference and I appeal t o Government to reconsid·er this mat ter.
I -am sure that Government would not like to disregard the vi'ews of the Hindoos and the Muslims in the Colony by taking this amendment throu,gh the Council.

I do ask hon.

Members who are familiar with the situation, some perhaps, more than I am, to have some regard the·se for Hindoos and Mu.slims.
feelings the of Rig,ht now in Jamaica - accor,l ing to i:lfurmation g iven to me by the Indian Oommissioner who passed through that Colony recently, there is a similar Bill being introduced there for the benefit of a small group of people - some 35,000 Indians residing there.

This Bill affects a much large1· 11.umber of people residing in this co-un· try, but it h as not even scratched the surface of the intricate problems with which it deals.

I do ask the hon.
I do ask the hon.

Mover of the Bill to give some indication ais to what body or group of persons has asked for an amendment of th•is nature.

Under the Indfa,n La,bour Ordba,nce ~ovision is made whereby anyone who does not want to r-emain under certain condi tion,s could apply to the Immigration Department and obtain a non-impedi I t hink the late Mr. ment c1ertificate.
Justice Luokhoo was the first man who used that section of the 01·di:lance to divest himself of this stigma whioh affects immi,grants and their relatives.

I can only ask what is the idea of havillg an Ordinance for o-:ily a few people if it would neV1er work.
Why should theS'e people be made to find money b order to go to a judge in Chambe·rs, or ,a Justice of the Peace, or to retain Counsel before they could 2725 Ma,rriage 21ST JUNE, 1957 ( Amendment) Bill 2726 [Mr. Sugrim Singh] do certain the India::i things unuer Labour Ord·inance?

All that is to be clone i.s that they should go to the lm m igriatio•n.

Agent-General and get from him a non-impediment certificate.
I think I have spoken enough on I will condude by this question and saying that while believe that the I intent ion of Government in this mat ter is good, the system (of marriage) which the B.ill seeks to intr,ocluce has something to do with those over .which there is no controversy, and is inter I do appeal to the woven with them.
Members of this, Council to, realize that this issue is one which borders vn the personal law of Hindoos and Muslims and that some consideration should he given to the Bill whic-h they have one which would bring com clrafted - plete ha.rmony among them once a:ul for all.

Right now I know of a. case wher e a man who was not legally married ha,s died and his estate valued at some $70,000 or $80,000 is going "down the drai11" .
T·he marriage p1,oblem among th'ese peopl e is not merely a case of "boy meets girl"; there are several intricate questions involved_ Mv re s.earch has disclosed some 37 cases befor,e Court right now question.

the~-e are the Supreme touching upon thia that If one looks at the · advertisements pu,bli,shed by the Public Trustee from time to time with respect to mo-nies escheat,ed by the Government, one would £.ind th!at ma:ny of those ,cases relate t•> persons who have not he·en legal.ly married.
Those are the t hings Hin duos and Muslims must bea.r i::J. mind.

One must not cas_e put new wine in.

old botUes.

The point is, in the Indian Labou r Ordinance t he onl?

ground on which the Inclian immigrant the mag ist r ate for a cian apply this in to divorce is misconduct.

There is no pro vidon for non-consummation of th e marriage, desertion or any other ground.
I may have exceeded my time in speaking, but I do 1a.sk Government to consider that it is the unanimous and Muslims r,equest of Hindoos and i.:i this Colony - speak with I to exarrnine the pro some au,thority - p.used draft Bill and not just devise an extra method ac;ceptable a small group who consider it infra dig and opprobious, in these mod.em days, to be described as immigrants.
to that Go:vennment It is impossible t o get unaminity Oll this question in this country, and I think should not take th is attitude because a few people throw a spanner in the works.

It is not a question of politics or my trying to 'srtand out' : this matter af I clo ask fec,ts perso':lal Government and my .colleagues in this Counc,il who are even more familiar with this matter more than I am, not to It does rush this amendme:it throug.h .
not touch the problem, and al:hough this Council is soon to be pror.o•gued, if this matter is allowed a Iiittle more time it will solve itself to the mutual satisfaction of everybody.

issues, and Mr. Speaker: Is, the hon.

Mem- 1ber -propos.bg to submit an amend ment?

Mr. Sugrim Singh: Yes, Sir.

Mr. S1>eaker: Well, try to do that i,n writing before we reach the Com mittee 1s,tage.

Mr. Ramphal: If the hon.


Mem ber is referring .to a complete amend ment o-f the Marpiage Bill - - 2727 Marriage 21ST JUNE, 1957 ( A mendment) Bill 2728 Mr. Sugrim Singh: I want to say Mr. Gajraj: I think it is now 120 yea.1,s since immig.rants from India first ca.me to British Guiana, a::id it was in the year 1918 that the last shi p bringing immigrants here touched these shor es.
Nearly 40 year s have passed by since then - enough time for two generations to have bee::i born and grown up out of the loins of those who made that last · trip to Briti,sh Guiana.

The I,ndia n Labour Ordinance to whieh l'eference has ibee::i made so many times this af.ternoon was des,igned and in t e11ded to ,be used ,in t he interest of those people wh o came here as Immi g rnnts.
rinto coming Rnot m erely gives, to them certain pri\nileges which, ,because they were i, a stra.ng-e new people country and meeting with customs w.hich were to some iextent different from those they left behind in their own ccuntry, and because in n ormal cir·cum stances one would expect that a Gov to bring ernment which arranges r,eople •from a into a strange land would oons~der it obliga tory upon it to make provisions which although not in the laws gov·erning the l'est of t he population and on the sur face they may a,ppear to be discrim inatory and in favour of the immigrant s, ,vere nevertheless neces.sary for their well being.
far-off land - the But wh en immigrants came :nto this country, they camie under cer tain co11diitions conditions which gave them ,t he ,right of 1·eturn passages t0 their native land - and under those conditions we may have t he ,claims of if t hose children and their dhdldr,en, the pa.rents wish to return to India at thie same time and by t he same ship.
,in 1S0 we firnd the section in the Indfan L abour Ordinance whic,h deals with ma.rriage and d-ivorce 1·ef.e1,e:ice is made to the immig,rants inti,oduced into at of fund expense or any tha,t perso:i."
That the country, That is where, I think, tire framers of the law made a mistake when they refer-red to the children as In section 131 we find descenda11ts, that a-n i.mmiigrairtt means "any per sun intr-oduced or coming to the Colony from A sia., whether directly or i::i or in <li rectly, and whether wholly the pa1'i; the otherwise, immigration descendant a,nd the of children of those immigrants and their g randchild1~en and great grandchil dren continue fo r the purposes of marriage and divor ce to be <fobbed In this Colony thoze as immigrants.
of us who have been born here r ecog nize this countr y as our home and are prepar ed to make every contribution towards the advancement of this coun t ry.
i n c ,1 u d 1e s is how Alongside t he other people of this is our whatever race, we feel country and we feel that in the same way as they, we ar e s ubjected to a ll the penalties of the law if we commit offenees, and so far as our children are concerned we do not expect them to be regarded as ic;econd class citi zens and to be dubbed " immigrants" and to be made to use some- of the provisions of this Ordinance wh ich we have heard this after noon refer to the immigrants who no longer ex It is unfair and unjust if we are ist.
going to take our place and sha~·e in the Colony's opportunities as well as privileges.

It is true that we can make appli t he cation for ex em p t i o n from provisions of the Indian Labour Or dinan ce, but if one looks at page 1456 of Volume II dealing with Chapter 104 of the Laws of the Colony, there is, a form of declar ation which any per~ son t hat Ordinance must fill in and.

sign.
sign.

It seeking eX'emption from ·-~ 2729 Marriage 21ST JUNE, 1957 ( Amendment) Bill 2730 [Mr. Gajraj] is clear from that, that the only per sons whom the Ordinance had in mind to be dubbed as immigrants are those who came to this Colony and their children.

granted exemption from the provisions of the Indian Labour Ordinance can have his marriage solemnized under his own religi-ous laws and be able to haye the marriage registered under the laws of the Colony.
The cleclarant has to say either that he is a11 immigant vvho came from India or an immigrant born in t/lis Colony.

He has to declare by what ~hip and on what date his father 01· mothel' arrived this Colony and to which plantation they were indentu red.

If that is not clear enough proof that the Indian LaboL;1· to Ordinance was only cover immigrants and thei1· first off .springs, then I do not think is necesEary for m e to continue.

intended in it ~ like the hon.


Member There is another point which I (Mr. would Sugrim Singh) to appreciate.

That is, under the Indian Labour Ordinance as soon as Indians accept the Chri~ tian religion they automatically move out from the provisions of that Ordin ance and go unde r the general laws of the Colony.

I r efer to section 135 and the subseque-nt sections, which show that very clearly.
So it is only those persons who wish to retain foe religion of their forefathers-Hind uism or I s by lam-who are personally affected this Ordinance because if a Hindu or a Muslim seeks exemption from the Or· dimmce he would be granted that quite easily.

I know that.

He then steps out into the open where no longer can ·i1e claim any of the benefits or protection of the Indian Labour Ordinance and has to live under the general laws of the Colony.

That is as he wishes it t o be.


But so far as marriage is con cerned he would find a void awaits him, as there is no provision in our laws that a Hindu or Muslim w110 h as been a That is the void that faces us - rnid foat we cannot fail to discuss and consider very !

:'friously.

It is to be ob Eerved that a Hindu or Muslim who wants to get married under his own marriage law may do so and then go to the Registrar General and have his marriage registered.
To say that he would haye to face the humiliation of having a second marriage performed af ter his own religious marriage is not the only important point to my mind.

The object of this Bill is to fill that void-to make provision for Hindoos and Muslims who desire to seek exemp tion under the Indian Labour Ordin ance and be able to marry in accordance with their own religious laws providing that eyery marriage is registered with in a giren time.
that it I have no desire to join is.sue with my colleague (M1·.

Sugrim Singh) v1ho has just spoke;n. I have li=stened to a ll he ha s had to\'lay and I can only come to the c-onclusion that he has proved conclusi\'ely is Government's duty ,1t this stage to prnvide an oppor tunity t o any section of the India.n communi ty-Hincloos or Muslims-to abandon the provisions of the Indian Labm· Ordinance and enjoy the pro tection of the general law as the other citizens of this country.
It is no good saying t hat the reli gious organisations are prepared to do this or that.

It is positive action that counts.

-If the organisations to which the hon.

Member ·iias ref.erred have be fore them a Bill which covers both sides their of the controversy, then it is duty to pass it on to Government for Governmenfs.

consideration.

2731 Marr·iage 21ST JUNE, 1%7 ( Amenclment) Bill 2732 ~-7 T here is no doubt that this present Government would not be able to give consideration to it.
The measure we haYe before us today has taken Sollie two year s of hard work to prepare; there have been many changes in the original draft Ordinance and we feel that what is proposed here now is just, fair and reasonable, and would be a,c of !

'epted by a considerable n umber persons of both the the Hindu and I also make the state Muslim faith.
ment that a,: the years roll by more and more Hindoos and Muslims will make use of this Bill, if accepted by the Council, than they are making of the I am one .of those present Ordinance.

who have stated that the marriage of I-lindoos and Muslims should be legal· ised.
On i-eading the Indian Labour Ordinance more closely I find that even in tilose early years when it was en acted, the intention was that with the arrirnl of every immigrant ship the find out agent was empowered whether there, were husbands or wives among the immigrants and to ha,·e them registered as snc11 in aecordnnce with the laws of the Colony.

Further prods ion is made in the Ordinance for permission to be granted to immigrant~ to marry, pro viding notice of 21 days is given.
to Then, there is pr.ovision for mar riage in ncco-rdance with one's per sonal religio us law, and that is where marriage in accordance with the fa.· in.

A non-impedi lamic faifo comes ment certificate ,could be obtained from the Immigration Agent General, and from this c-ertificate it rould be seen whether any of the parties w:i10 propose to marry were already married.

It is only reasonable to assume that that was the correct thing to be done.
The certificate had to be obtained from the Immigration Department be· cause that is where the records were kept.

No one is going to suggest tilat persons born in B.G.

but who have no connection with the country except with the family· tree of an immigrant, should be subjected or should continue to sub· ject themselve~1 to this form of law.

that feel myself My hon.


Friend (Mr. Sugrim Singh) has made capital of the fact that one can apply for the non-impediment certi ficate a,nd that if one is fortunate he rould have his marriage performed on the same day that he gets t his certifi cate.

I am going to ask' ·him, as a leader of his group and as a parent of children whether he doe-snot consider i t in their interest that those who -contract mar r iage should give s.ome degree of notice and have each marriage regis t ered?
Other,wise, there would be marriages in circumstances which the parties would regret afterwards·.

I s;uch notice sJJ.o uld be given by both Hindoos and Muslims and that w11en used properly it would pro\'ide a time lag between the agreement to marry (in accordance with the laws of either the actual ceremony of marriage by the p!t rties c·oncerned.

In the case of a Hindu the ceremony confirming the.
en° gagement and arranging details of the marriage ceremony is known as a T ilak and in t he case of Muslims it is known In some cases there are as a Mang11i.

double ceremonies-two Tilaks and two Mangnis.

So that iii the marriage sys tem we haYe the ingredient ·of publicity -public·ity of intention to marry, and if there is any impediment it can be brought to notice before the ceremony is actua)ly performed.
That, in my opinion, completely negatiYes any argu ment that thern should be no period of time for notice to be given .of the pro posed marriage.

religion ) and I want to say foat I was rather disappointed to hear my hon.

Friend (Mr. S'llgrim Singh,) say he was sorry to know that Hindu and Muslim priests ~ 2733 Ma.rriage 21ST JUNE, 1957 ( Amendment) Bill 2734 [Mr. Gajraj] would be registered as marriage officers.
For years and years the people in this Colony of Indian descent have been clamouring - Mr. Sugrim Singh: I nm sorry my friend did not understand me.

I would like to see t hem registered I want him to af.

marriage officers.

bear that in mind.

I a m sorry if I created the wrong imp,ression.

thank l\'Ir.

Gajraj: the hon.

I Member, but I had put down his exact th ose word:o may words.

However, not have conveyed his views exactly.


There have been many others who have accepted this claim to be registered, and they must take the c,bligations which go with the privi,.. leges.

All good citizens would agree that if one claims privileges one must also accept l'esponsibilities.
have been inn umerable abuses and today the Muslims of Trinidad, or ver y many of them, refuse to have their daughters married under the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Ordin• ance and have them re g i st ere d a ccording to the general laws of t he true, any colony.

In Is,lam, person of proper age and education may presid•e over the marriage of two persons.

There must be publication of the marriage and at J.east two cred In the ible witnesses to be there.
matter of divorce Islamic method/'\ are adopted and the marriage officers are also registered as divorce offic,ers.

is it 'l'he very thing my friend (Mr. Sugrim Singh) was talking about: people getting man-ied and at the same time the law being pushed aside, in Trinidad.

has beien happening Today the Ordinance is almost a dead letter on the Statute Book of Trinidad.

I would not like to see t hat happen here.

We must benefit from the ex- 11errence of others.


So far as this important a8pect of human life is concerned, it is my firm opinion that there should be a comprehensive Marriage Ordinance which will cover the requ irements of all the people of British Gui:rna, whatever religion they may belong to.

It is true that in Trinidad there are three Marr iage Ordinances.

There is in that colony a genleral Marriage Ordinance which like ours was drafted to cover those who belong to the Chr istian faith.
Many years ago the Hindu Marriage law was passed, a nd then followed the Muslim Marriage law.

I am not in a position to say how the Hindu Ma rriage Jaw operates - I h ave heard the hon.

Member (Mr. Sugrim Singh) say that the Hindu religion does not accept divorce.
But in the case of the Muslim Marriage law in Trinidad, I am in a position to ~tate that from the divorce angle there Her e we are prnposing to amend the Marriage Ordina nce: We :ire not stepping on the corns of one or both of the r eligions concerned.

All we are saying through this Bill is, " carry c-ut you r ma rriage ceremonies accord ing to the tenets of your r eligion.'

Indeed no one can make a priest per form a marriage ceremony in a ny other form than his church lays down.
So n o pundit or moulvi can be pu shed into doing one t hing or the other.

But having carried out that marriage in accordance with his r eligion, he is bound by his accleptance of r egis tration to have that marriage r egis tered.

I am claiming In or der to make this thing apply 100 per cent.
to all Hindoos a nd Mus lims that the v'ery prie£ts- the pu ndits and the moulvis are the ones who s,hould refuse to f,olemnize any ma rriage betwee1~ a ~ --... 2735 Marriage 21ST JUNE, 1957 ( Am,endment) Bill 2736 couple unless t hat marriage is.

going to be registered, I lay t,his charge at their doors, that it is thesie pundits and moulvis who are to a great extent responsible for the confusion to which my hon.

Friend (Mr. Sugrim Singh) referr1ecl.


For if they are the 0nes 1!,Ccepted as religious heads in the various sections of the country and they are looked up to for guidance, and still they do not see to it that marriages in accordance with their r eligious laws are also made legal in accordance with the laws of the coun try, then no one else can be blam'ed for it.

to a ct a s a judge, and if there is enough ·evidence he can decide that the marriage shou ld be dissolved.
'I'hat provision was made in the clays whe n people were still comi!lg from India a s indentured Immigrants, when they did not know how to mak,c' use of the laws h.ere, when they needed h'elp and protection.

But I say that for people w ho have been born here two generations aft!er, that form of mollycoddling has no pface.

Apart from that, there is protec- For example tion of Indian wives.
cect ion 151 says: the priests To say that the parents of the parties marrying have also contributed to the ill-doing is not to state the truth.

I know of many cases to which Mr. Sugrim Singh has referred, where themselves havle been saying, "Oh, it is not neces:;,ary to 11egister the marriage" when it comes to the marriage of their sons.

But I know that the same priests , when it comes to the marriage of their daughters, saying, "Boy, yon have to sign this paper before you get manied to my daughter."
In other words, they protect their own but not the daughters of other men.

That I think is an un.fair and wrong thing.

I am sure I am going to be a very unpopular man among the pundits and moulvis a s a res ult of what I have said; but truth is truth a:nd it will stand the test of time.

spoke of I am glad my friend (Mr. Sugrim the grounds for Singh) divorce under Indian La.bour the Ordinance; that if there is miscon duct a party can take his or her case to the magistrate who is emrowered "151.
Everyone who entices away or cohabits with the wife of an immigrant, or unlawfully harbours the wife of an left h er husband immigrant who has without just cause, shall be liable to a p enalty not exceed ing twenty-four dollars or to imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for an y term not exceeding three months, or to both the penalty and im prisonment, and, on a second or any sub sequent offence; shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour and be punishable accordingly: Provided that no one shall be convicted under this section for cohabiting with the wife of an immigrant if he establishes to the satisfaction of the magistrate or cou rt before whom he is tried, that the w.ife was d eser ted b y her husband, or that the husband compelled her to leave his house, or that the cohabitation was with t he knowledge and consen t of the h usband."
Those provis ions are put there for a. people uprooted from their native country a nd brought here and not for those of u·s born here a nd who rub shou lder~ with the other races and com ider ourselves equal citizens with a ll.

I claim that the provis,ions of the India n Labour Ordinance m ay remain in force a s long as there are people her e who are entitled to their bene fit!

:, but there is no s,uch obligation for the younger generation.

2731 Marriage ( A'1ndt.)


B ill 21ST JUNE, 1957 Adjournment 2738 [Mr. Gajraj] My few words have indicated how strongly I feel in favour of thi.s Bill.

I feel it is a great st ep forward for Hindoos and Muslims when their re spective religion is_ accepted as not inferior to the State r eligion, Christ think it is something they ianity.

I s1h ~uld be proud of, that this Govern ment appreciates a nd acknowledges.
wiSth to put forward any proposals to the Government, this Government would be willing to give consideration to them.

This Bill is what we need and I have no hesitation in saying that we should grasp it with both hands.

The Chief Secretary: I move that Council adjourn to Tuesday.

If at any time the Hindu and the community Muslim sections of Council adjourned Tuesday, 25th June, 1957. to 2 p.m. on """"-