taken on board a number of Chinese passengers in Hong Kong, but proceeded beyond the jurisdiction of the Colony before this was discovered, and afterwards sailed for Macao without having been cleared by the Emigration Officer or given Bond, and without any Emigration papers". While she was still in the vicinity of Hong Kong, but beyond the limits of the Colony, you applied to Admiral Sir I. Stirling to seize her on the ground that she had violated the Chinese Passenger Act.
118 Act. Sir I. Stirling declined to comply, observing that he had no authority to seize and detain a ship for violating the Chinese Passenger Act, such ship "not being a British Ship, and not within Her Majesty's Dominions".
The question arises whether in the present instance the "General Glance" was liable to seizure on the High Seas for violation of the Chinese Passenger Act.
4. On this point there can, I conceive, be no doubt that Admiral Sir I. Stirling...