A ricsha coolie was charged with plying for hire, not having obtained a public license from the Gouncil.
Constable Burnside said that the man had been employed by a foreigner. for some time past as private riesha colic." The riesha was the property of the cooli and he should have obtained a public license if he desired to ply for hire. The ¥98 records of the tax department showed no license had been obtained for this riesha for six months past.
Inspector Matheson said that this was another of a series of cases in which certain members of the public seemed to be under a misapprehension regarding the system of riesha licenses.
'A coolie owning a riesha would agree to become: private riesha coolie " to another patton for about 810 per month, and the rer would take out a private ricsha license. This was not permissible under the Regulations, by which all but bond fide private-owned ricshas were supposed to be provided with a public Heense. A public license for the two Settlements cost §9 per quarter, whereas a private license cost but 2 for a similar period. If the regulations were observed a considerable sum in addition to present collections would be added to the revenue. When a previous case of this kind had 0 curred the North-China Daily New had called attention to it, so there was no ground for pleading ignorance. Further, these "private coolies" frequently accepted fares when not actually employed by their "masters" and thus competed unfairly with the proprietors of public licensed ricshas.
Accused was fined 85, and ordered to take out licenses for the past. six months.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.